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

I possess some opinions regarding that remarks delivered by ESPN commentator a well-known announcer after Novak Djokovic's win over Taylor Fritz during the US Open last eight. Look – Fritz is the United States, the commentator is from the US – and athletic competitions often lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of disappointment would have been appropriate. Instead, Fowler brought up the continued drought of US male players at the majors: none of them has won a trophy since the last American champion in 2003, and Fritz had been the last one standing in the competition.

Everyone love a narrative, me too. But really. Suppose Fritz had beaten Djokovic for the first time, force of nature Carlos Alcaraz was looming in the following match, whom he has never defeated in an official match. And if he’d somehow survived that, it would have been defending champion the Italian, versus him the American had lost 10 of the previous eleven sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also split the last seven major titles (and the Spaniard went on to thrash a tired Djokovic in the subsequent match). He stated in post-match interviews after the loss that he in fact preferred his path, because it offered the opportunity to beat the three best players in the world in succession. Fritz is well justified to aspire to the achievement; an competitor is meant to have faith in themselves. But going into that Djokovic quarter-final what other person in their right mind had the drought of US winners on the brain?

Fritz, twenty-eight, is placed fourth in the global rankings starting the upcoming year-end championships and has won his last six matches over third-ranked Alexander Zverev with increasing ease. It's likely he might claim that position for himself in the coming years. But it’s clear that right now, that is as high as he can rise: The Italian and Spaniard lie a chasm of ranking points away. His elite delivery and powerful power on both front side and reverse side are more than adequate to defeat most opponents on the professional circuit. When facing the select few generational talents, though, Fritz is frequently helpless. The last several seasons has witnessed the interesting rise of tall, gangly players who can nonetheless move around with the surprising speed and fluidity of smaller men. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and appears that way. His footwork is stiff, as if he hasn't fully adapted to his legs. So he seldom win a rally that the other player was controlling, and hitting a drop shot against him is typically a safe bet. That serves as a pretty harsh limitation on his potential.

The American has made a several dramatic, unexpected improvements throughout his career. At the beginning of the decade, he was hovering around the lower end of the world's best thirty. 24 months later, he was approaching the top 10. Last year, he suddenly exploded up to No 4 – and held the position. But the subsequent step, mixing it up with and defeating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and even a declining Djokovic, is the highest of all. What could Fowler thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate mentioning the continuing slump of American men winning grand slams when Fritz had exited the US Open in the quarter-finals? The desperation is simply excessive and the respect for the magnitude of the task too little.

Fritz’s play in that very quarter-final ought to have been enough of an sign. Djokovic triumphed in four sets, a victory that only seemed uncertain for moments towards the very end, when Fritz had survived a few championship opportunities and had a opportunity to hold for 5-5. The duo appeared well-balanced during the rallies, with Fritz earning plenty of opportunities to win the opponent's serve. But the champion saved break point after break point, prolonging the run to the brink of agony. When he finally did claim one of the opportunities at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he immediately played a horrendous game to lose his own serve once more; Djokovic had lulled him into a battle peripheral to the main contest and forced him to use excessive effort to win it. Down match points in the last game, Fritz’s first serve floated to the sky. He prolonged the match twice on his second serve, but finally double-faulted. It wasn’t a collapse, in my opinion, just a result of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The match was fairly compelling evidence that the American is insufficiently skilled to defeat any version of Djokovic, that was defeated by Alcaraz in the next round and did not particularly seem like he believed he could triumph. This is perfectly acceptable – the Serbian is the best player ever, and might not be at the peak of his athletic abilities now, but has acquired enough experience and strategic intelligence to make up for quite a bit of the drop-off. The problem is those who were expecting Fritz to prevail, and putting pressure on him to do so, when he was yet to accomplished anything that suggested he would.

The American is an valuable contributor to the tour regardless. He’s a calm, thoughtful presence in press conferences, more so than virtually everyone on the men's tour aside from the Russian star, prepared to not only say his emotions or the strategy he believed determined a match, but clarify it. That he ought to bear the brunt of the responsibility for the United States failing to produce a male major champion since the last American titlist feels unfair. (Since Ben Shelton is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, maybe they can divide that load.)

“I’d probably think about it indefinitely if I fail to do it,” Fritz told an interviewer in the summer of winning a grand slam. It is hoped he understands that he’s not a failure if he does not fulfill that objective, that overcoming Alcaraz and Sinner’s young, terrifying reign is in fact extremely unlikely for everybody else. {