American Men's Major Title Dry Spell Isn't Taylor Fritz's Responsibility to Carry

I have a few thoughts about the remarks delivered by the sports network commentator a well-known announcer following the Serbian champion's victory over Taylor Fritz in the New York major last eight. Consider – the athlete represents the United States, Fowler is from the US – and sports often lend themselves to nationalism. Some disappointment was understandable. Rather, he invoked the continued absence of US male players at the majors: none of them had lifted a trophy since Andy Roddick in 2003, and Fritz had been the last one standing in the tournament.

We all enjoy a storyline, myself included. But come on. Suppose the American had beaten the legend for the first time, phenomenal talent Carlos Alcaraz was looming in the next round, whom he has yet to beat in an official match. And had he someway gotten past that, it would have been title holder Jannik Sinner, against whom Fritz had dropped 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 subsequent match). He stated in press after the loss that he actually liked his path, because it presented the opportunity to defeat the three best players in the sport in succession. He is well justified to aspire to the accomplishment; an competitor is meant to believe in themselves. But entering that Serbian last eight match who else sensibly had the lack of American champions on the brain?

The American, 28, is ranked fourth in the world entering the upcoming year-end championships and has won his previous six encounters over No 3 Alexander Zverev with growing comfort. Presumably he could take that spot for himself in the coming years. But evidently that at present, that’s as high as he can climb: The Italian and Spaniard sit a vast gap of ranking points away. His top-class delivery and concussive power on both forehand and backhand are more than adequate to defeat the majority of opponents on the ATP tour. When facing the select few generational talents, however, Fritz is often overmatched. The last several years has witnessed the interesting emergence of lanky, towering athletes who can nevertheless move around with the alarming speed and fluidity of much shorter men. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His movement is rigid, 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 usually a reliable tactic. That serves as a pretty severe limitation on his potential.

The American has made a several significant, improbable improvements over the years. Early on of the ten-year period, he was hovering around the bottom of the top 30. Two years after, he was approaching the elite ten. The previous season, he suddenly exploded up to No 4 – and maintained the position. But the subsequent step, mixing it up with and defeating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, the Italian, and including a declining Djokovic, is the highest of all. What was Fowler have been thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to defeat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate commenting on the continuing slump of US male players lifting major titles when he had departed the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is simply too much and the respect for the magnitude of the task too little.

Fritz’s performance in that exact last eight match should have been enough of an sign. Djokovic won in four rounds, a win that only seemed uncertain for brief periods towards the conclusion, when the American had saved a few match points and had a chance to maintain serve for 5-5. The duo looked evenly matched during the exchanges, with the American creating plenty of opportunities to break. But the champion rescued service break opportunity after service break opportunity, extending the streak to the brink of frustration. When he finally did convert one of the chances at 5-5 in the second set, he promptly played a horrendous service game to drop serve once more; the Serbian had drawn him into a skirmish peripheral to the main contest and compelled him to expend far too much effort to prevail. Down match points in the last game, Fritz’s first serve sailed to heaven. He extended the match twice on his second serve, but finally double-faulted. It wasn’t a collapse, I didn’t think, only a result of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The contest was fairly ironclad proof that the American is not good enough to defeat any version of the Serbian, who was defeated by the Spaniard in the following match and did not especially seem like he believed he could triumph. This is absolutely acceptable – Djokovic is the greatest of all time, and may not be at the height of his athletic abilities now, but has developed sufficient experience and strategic intelligence to compensate for quite a bit of the drop-off. The problem is those who were anticipating the American to win, and putting pressure on him to do so, when he was yet to accomplished anything that suggested he would.

The American is an asset to the tour nonetheless. He’s a patient, thoughtful presence in media sessions, more so than almost anyone on the ATP except for the Russian star, willing to not only say his emotions or the strategy he believed decided a match, but explain it. That he should bear the brunt of the blame for America failing to spawn a men's grand slam winner since the last American titlist feels unjust. (Now that the fellow American is competing alongside him in the rankings, maybe they can share that burden.)

“I’d probably think about it forever if I fail to accomplish it,” the American informed an interviewer in the summer of claiming a major. I hope he understands that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t fulfill that goal, that breaking through Alcaraz and Sinner’s dominant, formidable empire is actually highly unlikely for everybody else. {