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

I have a few thoughts regarding the comments delivered by ESPN broadcaster a well-known announcer following the Serbian champion's victory over the American player during the US Open quarter-finals. Look – Fritz is American, the commentator is American – and sports often encourage patriotic sentiment. Some disappointment was understandable. Rather, he invoked the ongoing absence of US male players at the majors: none of them has won a trophy since Andy Roddick in 2003, and Fritz had been the last one standing in the tournament.

Everyone enjoy a storyline, me too. But come on. Even if the American had beaten Djokovic for the first time, phenomenal talent the Spanish star was looming in the next round, who he has never defeated in an official match. And had he somehow gotten past that, it would have been title holder the Italian, against whom Fritz had lost 10 of the previous eleven sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also divided the previous seven grand slams (and Alcaraz went on to thrash a tired Djokovic in the next round). Fritz said in post-match interviews following his defeat that he actually preferred his draw, because it presented the opportunity to defeat the top three players in the world in succession. He is more than justified to aim for the achievement; an competitor is supposed to have faith in themselves. But entering that Serbian quarter-final who else sensibly had the drought of US winners on the brain?

Fritz, 28, is placed number four in the global rankings entering the upcoming year-end championships and has secured his last six encounters over third-ranked Alexander Zverev with increasing ease. Presumably he could take that spot for himself in the coming years. But evidently that right now, that’s as far as he can climb: Sinner and Alcaraz sit a vast gap of performance metrics away. Fritz’s top-class delivery and concussive strength on both forehand and backhand are more than adequate to dispose of most rivals on the ATP tour. When facing the handful of once-in-a-lifetime players, however, he is often helpless. The last several years has witnessed the curious rise of lanky, towering players who can nevertheless cover the court with the surprising quickness and grace of smaller men. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His movement is rigid, as if he’s still getting used to his limbs. So he seldom win a rally that the other player was controlling, and playing a drop shot versus him is usually a reliable tactic. That acts as a pretty harsh restriction on his potential.

Fritz has achieved a several significant, improbable advancements over the years. At the beginning of the decade, he was circling the bottom of the top 30. Two years later, he was sniffing the top 10. The previous season, he unexpectedly surged up to No 4 – and held the position. But the next leap, competing against and beating legendary figures like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and even a aging Djokovic, is the highest of all. What could Fowler have been thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a serious threat to beat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate commenting on the ongoing drought of American men lifting grand slams when he had departed the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just too much and the appreciation for the difficulty of the task insufficient.

Fritz’s play in that exact quarter-final should have been sufficient of an indication. The Serbian won in four sets, a victory that only felt tenuous for brief periods towards the conclusion, when the American had saved a few championship opportunities and had a opportunity to maintain serve for 5-5. The pair appeared well-balanced during the exchanges, with Fritz creating numerous chances to break. But the champion saved service break opportunity after break point, prolonging the run to the brink of frustration. When Fritz eventually did convert a single of the chances at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he immediately produced a horrendous service game to lose his own serve once more; Djokovic had drawn him into a battle peripheral to the main contest and forced him to use excessive energy to win it. Facing set points in the last game, Fritz’s primary delivery sailed to the sky. He extended the match twice on his second serve, but finally double-faulted. It wasn’t a choke, in my opinion, only a consequence of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The contest was fairly compelling proof that Fritz is insufficiently skilled to defeat any version of the Serbian, that lost to the Spaniard in the following match and never particularly appeared like he believed he could win. This is perfectly acceptable – Djokovic is the greatest of all time, and may not be at the peak of his athletic abilities anymore, but has acquired sufficient experience and strategic intelligence to make up for a significant portion of the drop-off. The issue is the individuals who were anticipating Fritz to win, and putting pressure on him to do so, 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 everyone on the men's tour aside from Daniil Medvedev, willing to not only say how he feels or the strategy he felt determined a match, but clarify it. That he ought to bear the brunt of the responsibility for the United States failing to produce a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick seems unjust. (Now that Ben Shelton is competing alongside him in the rankings, perhaps they can share that burden.)

“I would likely think about it indefinitely if I fail to do it,” the American informed a journalist in the summer of winning a major. I hope he realizes that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t achieve that goal, that breaking through Alcaraz and Sinner’s dominant, formidable empire is in fact highly improbable for everybody else. {