US Male Major Title Dry Spell Isn't Taylor Fritz's Burden to Bear

I have a few thoughts regarding the comments made by ESPN commentator Chris Fowler after the Serbian champion's win over Taylor Fritz during the New York major last eight. Look – Fritz is American, Fowler is American – and sports often lend themselves to nationalism. Some letdown would have been understandable. Instead, he invoked the ongoing absence of American men at the majors: not one of them has won a trophy since Andy Roddick in 2003, and he had been the last one standing in the competition.

We all enjoy a narrative, me too. But really. Even if Fritz defeated Djokovic for the first time, force of nature Carlos Alcaraz was looming in the following match, who Fritz has never defeated in an competitive encounter. And if he’d someway gotten past that, it would have been title holder the Italian, versus him Fritz had lost 10 of the last 11 sets. The two young stars had also split the previous seven grand slams (plus Alcaraz went on to thrash a fatigued Serbian in the next round). He said in press after the loss that he in fact liked his draw, because it offered the chance to defeat the three best competitors in the sport back-to-back. Fritz is more than within his right to aspire to the accomplishment; an athlete is supposed to believe in themselves. But going into that Djokovic quarter-final what other person sensibly had the lack of US winners in mind?

The American, twenty-eight, is placed fourth in the global rankings entering this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has won his previous six encounters over No 3 the German with growing comfort. Presumably he might take that spot for himself in the coming years. But evidently that at present, that is as high as he can rise: The Italian and Spaniard sit a vast gap of ranking points away. Fritz’s top-class delivery and powerful strength on both front side and reverse side are sufficiently adequate to dispose of most opponents on the ATP tour. When facing the select few generational talents, however, he is often helpless. The past few seasons has seen the interesting emergence of lanky, towering athletes who can nonetheless move around with the surprising quickness and fluidity of smaller men. Fritz is six-foot-five and looks it. His movement is stiff, as if he’s still getting used to his limbs. So he’ll rarely steal a point that the other player was dictating, and hitting a soft shot against him is usually a safe bet. That serves as a quite harsh restriction on his potential.

The American has made a number of significant, unexpected improvements over the years. At the beginning of the decade, he was circling the bottom of the world's best thirty. 24 months after, he was sniffing the elite ten. The previous season, he unexpectedly surged to fourth place – and maintained the position. But the subsequent step, competing against and beating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and including a aging Serbian, is the toughest of all. What was Fowler thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a serious threat to beat them all back-to-back? That it was worth commenting on the ongoing drought of US male players lifting grand slams when Fritz had exited the US Open in the quarter-finals? The desperation is just excessive and the appreciation for the difficulty of the task insufficient.

The American's performance in that very quarter-final should have been enough of an indication. The Serbian won in four rounds, a win that only seemed tenuous for moments towards the conclusion, when the American had saved a couple match points and had a opportunity to maintain serve for 5-5. The duo appeared well-balanced during the rallies, with the American earning plenty of chances to win the opponent's serve. But the champion rescued service break opportunity after break point, prolonging the streak to the brink of agony. When Fritz eventually did convert a single of the opportunities at 5-5 in the second set, he promptly played a horrendous service game to lose his own serve once more; the Serbian had drawn him into a battle peripheral to the real battle and forced him to expend excessive energy to prevail. Facing match points in the final game, Fritz’s first serve sailed to heaven. He extended the contest twice on his backup delivery, but finally double-faulted. It was not a choke, in my opinion, only a result of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The contest was fairly ironclad evidence that Fritz is not good enough to beat any version of the Serbian, who was defeated by the Spaniard in the following match and never especially appeared like he thought he could triumph. This is absolutely acceptable – the Serbian is the best player ever, and may not be at the height of his athletic abilities anymore, but has acquired enough experience and strategic intelligence to compensate for quite a bit of the drop-off. The problem is the individuals who were anticipating Fritz to prevail, and pressuring him to achieve that, when he was yet to done anything that suggested he would.

Fritz is an asset to the tour regardless. He’s a patient, reflective presence in media sessions, exceeding virtually anyone on the men's tour aside from Daniil Medvedev, prepared to not only express his emotions or the tactic he believed decided a contest, but clarify it. That he ought to shoulder the majority of the responsibility for America failing to spawn a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick feels unfair. (Since the fellow American is rubbing shoulders with him in the standings, maybe they can share that load.)

“I’d probably dwell on it indefinitely if I fail to accomplish it,” Fritz informed a journalist in June of claiming a major. It is hoped he realizes that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t fulfill that goal, that breaking through the Spanish and Italian's young, terrifying empire is in fact highly unlikely for all other players. {