US Male Grand Slam Drought Isn't Fritz's Responsibility to Carry

I possess some opinions about that remarks delivered by the sports network commentator a well-known announcer following the Serbian champion's victory over the American player in the US Open last eight. Look – the athlete represents the United States, the commentator is American – and athletic competitions often lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of letdown was understandable. Rather, he invoked the continued drought of US male players at the majors: none of them had lifted a title since Andy Roddick in 2003, and Fritz had been the final representative in the tournament.

We all enjoy a storyline, me too. But really. Suppose Fritz defeated the legend for the initial occasion, phenomenal talent the Spanish star was waiting in the next round, whom Fritz has yet to beat in an official match. And if he’d somehow survived that, it would have been defending champion Jannik Sinner, versus him Fritz had dropped 10 of the last 11 sets. The two young stars had also split the last seven grand slams (and Alcaraz went on to thrash a tired Djokovic in the next round). He stated in press following his defeat that he actually liked his draw, because it offered the chance to beat the top three players in the sport back-to-back. He is well justified to aim for the accomplishment; an competitor is meant to have faith in themselves. But entering that Serbian last eight match what other person in their right mind had the drought of US winners in mind?

The American, twenty-eight, is placed number four in the world entering the upcoming year-end championships and has secured his previous six matches over third-ranked Alexander Zverev with growing comfort. It's likely he could claim that position for himself in the future. But it’s clear that at present, that’s as high as he can climb: Sinner and Alcaraz lie a chasm of ranking points away. Fritz’s top-class serve and concussive power on both front side and backhand are more than enough to defeat the majority of opponents on the ATP tour. When facing the select few generational talents, though, he is often helpless. The past few seasons has seen the curious emergence of lanky, towering players who can nonetheless cover the court with the alarming quickness and fluidity of much shorter players. Fritz is six-foot-five and looks it. His movement is rigid, as if he hasn't fully adapted to his limbs. So he seldom win a rally that the other player was dictating, and playing a soft shot versus him is usually a reliable tactic. That acts as a pretty severe restriction on his potential.

Fritz has achieved a number of significant, improbable improvements throughout his career. Early on of the decade, he was hovering around the bottom of the top 30. 24 months after, he was approaching the top 10. The previous season, he unexpectedly exploded up to fourth place – and held the spot. But the next leap, mixing it up with and beating legendary figures like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and including a aging Serbian, is the highest of all. What was the commentator have been thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a serious threat to defeat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate commenting on the ongoing drought of US male players lifting grand slams when Fritz had departed the New York major in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just excessive and the respect for the magnitude of the task too little.

The American's performance in that exact last eight match ought to have been sufficient of an sign. The Serbian triumphed in four sets, a win that only seemed tenuous for moments towards the conclusion, when Fritz had survived a couple championship opportunities and had a opportunity to maintain serve for 5-5. The duo looked well-balanced during the rallies, with Fritz creating plenty of opportunities to break. But the champion saved break point after break point, extending the streak to the point of frustration. When Fritz eventually did claim a single of the chances at 5-5 in the second set, he promptly played a horrendous game to drop serve again; the Serbian had drawn him into a battle peripheral to the main contest and compelled him to use excessive energy to prevail. Facing match points in the last game, Fritz’s first serve sailed to the sky. He prolonged the contest twice on his second serve, but finally double-faulted. It was not a collapse, in my opinion, just a consequence of needing to hit too many weaker deliveries.

The contest was quite compelling evidence that the American is not good enough to beat any form of Djokovic, who was defeated by Alcaraz in the next round and did not especially seem like he thought he could triumph. This is perfectly acceptable – the Serbian is the best player ever, and may not be at the height of his athletic abilities anymore, but has developed enough knowledge and strategic intelligence to compensate for a significant portion of the decline. The problem is the individuals who were expecting Fritz to win, and putting pressure on him to achieve that, when he was had not done anything that suggested he would.

Fritz is an asset to the circuit nonetheless. He’s a patient, thoughtful presence in press conferences, more so than virtually anyone on the ATP aside from Daniil Medvedev, prepared to not only say how he feels or the tactic he felt determined a contest, but clarify it. That he should bear the brunt of the responsibility for America failing to spawn a men's grand slam winner since the last American titlist seems unfair. (Now that the fellow American is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, maybe they can share that burden.)

“I’d probably dwell on it forever if I don’t accomplish it,” the American informed an interviewer in June of claiming a grand slam. I hope he realizes that he’s not unsuccessful if he doesn’t fulfill that goal, that overcoming the Spanish and Italian's dominant, formidable empire is in fact extremely improbable for all other players. {