American Men's Grand Slam Drought Isn't Fritz's Burden to Bear

I possess a few opinions about that comments delivered by ESPN broadcaster a well-known announcer after the Serbian champion's victory over Taylor Fritz during the New York major quarter-finals. Look – Fritz is American, the commentator is American – and athletic competitions often lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of disappointment was appropriate. Instead, he invoked the ongoing drought of American men at grand slam tournaments: none of them has won a trophy since the last American champion in 2003, and Fritz had been the final representative in the competition.

We all love a storyline, myself included. But come on. Suppose the American defeated Djokovic for the initial occasion, phenomenal talent the Spanish star was waiting in the following match, whom Fritz has yet to beat in an official match. And if he’d somehow gotten past that, it would have been title holder the Italian, versus him Fritz had lost 10 of the last 11 sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also split the previous seven grand slams (plus the Spaniard went on to defeat a tired Serbian in the subsequent match). He stated in post-match interviews after the loss that he actually liked his draw, because it offered the opportunity to defeat the top three players in the world back-to-back. Fritz is more than within his right to aspire to the accomplishment; an athlete is meant to have faith in themselves. But entering that Djokovic last eight match who else sensibly had the drought of American champions on the brain?

Fritz, twenty-eight, is placed number four in the global rankings starting this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has won his last six matches over third-ranked Alexander Zverev with growing comfort. It's likely he might take that spot for himself in the coming years. But evidently that right now, that’s as high as he can rise: Sinner and Alcaraz sit a chasm of ranking points away. Fritz’s elite serve and concussive strength on both forehand and reverse side are more than adequate to defeat most opponents on the professional circuit. Against the handful of once-in-a-lifetime players, though, he is frequently overmatched. The last several years has witnessed the interesting rise of tall, gangly players who can nevertheless cover the court with the surprising quickness and fluidity of much shorter men. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and appears that way. His footwork is rigid, as if he hasn't fully adapted to his limbs. So he’ll rarely steal a point that the opponent was dictating, and hitting a drop shot versus him is usually a safe bet. That acts as a quite harsh restriction on his upside.

The American has made a several dramatic, improbable improvements over the years. At the beginning of the decade, he was hovering around the bottom of the top 30. Two years after, he was approaching the top 10. Last year, he unexpectedly exploded up to fourth place – and maintained the position. But the next leap, mixing it up with and beating all-time-greats like Alcaraz, the Italian, and even a declining Djokovic, is the highest of all. What could the commentator have been thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was worth mentioning the ongoing slump of American men lifting major titles when Fritz had exited the US Open in the quarter-finals? The desperation is just excessive and the respect for the magnitude of the challenge too little.

Fritz’s performance in that very last eight match ought to have been enough of an indication. The Serbian triumphed in four sets, a win that only seemed tenuous for brief periods towards the conclusion, when Fritz had saved a few championship opportunities and had a opportunity to hold for 5-5. The duo looked evenly matched during the rallies, with the American creating plenty of opportunities to win the opponent's serve. But Djokovic rescued break point after break point, extending the run to the brink of frustration. When he eventually did convert a single of the chances at 5-5 in the second set, he promptly produced a terrible service game to lose his own serve once more; the Serbian had drawn him into a skirmish peripheral to the real battle and compelled him to expend far too much effort to prevail. Down match points in the final game, his primary delivery floated to the sky. He extended the contest two times on his backup delivery, but ultimately double-faulted. It was not a collapse, in my opinion, only a consequence of needing to hit too many weaker deliveries.

The contest was fairly ironclad evidence that the American is not good enough to beat any version of the Serbian, that was defeated by Alcaraz in the next round and did not especially seem like he believed he could triumph. This is absolutely fine – the Serbian is the greatest of all time, and might not be at the peak of his physical powers now, but has acquired enough knowledge and tactical know-how to make up for quite a bit of the decline. The problem is those who were expecting Fritz to prevail, and putting pressure on him to achieve that, when he was had not done anything that indicated he could.

The American is an asset to the circuit regardless. He’s a patient, reflective voice in press conferences, more so than almost anyone on the men's tour aside from the Russian star, willing to not just say how he feels or the tactic he felt determined a contest, but clarify it. That he ought to shoulder the majority of the blame for America not spawn a male major champion since the last American titlist feels unfair. (Since Ben Shelton is competing alongside him in the rankings, maybe they can divide that burden.)

“I would likely dwell on it forever if I don’t accomplish it,” Fritz told a journalist in June of claiming a grand slam. It is hoped he understands that he’s not unsuccessful if he doesn’t achieve that objective, that overcoming the Spanish and Italian's dominant, formidable reign is actually extremely unlikely for all other players. {