Connect with us

Culture

Taylor Fritz’s U.S. Open final offers hope for men’s tennis — and a reality check

Published

on

Taylor Fritz’s U.S. Open final offers hope for men’s tennis — and a reality check

NEW YORK — In the build-up to Wimbledon, Taylor Fritz said men’s tennis feels more open now, compared with the Big Three era.

“It took just one of them to be playing incredibly well,” he said of Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer.

“We were younger and not as good as we are now. You were hoping that they’d have an off day and you’d have an on day,” Fritz said. “Nowadays, anyone in the top 15, it’s kind of whoever plays better.

“It’s exciting for all of us because we know that all it takes is two weeks or 10 days of playing really high-level tennis, and taking the opportunity as best as possible.”

This U.S. Open has proved Fritz right and wrong. Early exits for Djokovic and Carlos Alcaraz offered hope to the chasing pack, but the tournament ended upholding the status quo, as world No. 1 Jannik Sinner won his second Grand Slam of the year by beating Fritz 6-3, 6-4, 7-5.

Advertisement

With the other two majors of 2024 going to Alcaraz, 21, he and Sinner, 23, have won five of the last six Slams. They are delivering at the sharp end of majors with Big Three-like efficiency, and they’re still quite young.

Their domination feels different to the rest of the locker room, though. After Frances Tiafoe was defeated by Fritz in Friday’s semifinal, he said this tournament had been “big” in showing the best of the rest that a Grand Slam win is within reach. “It shows that it’s definitely possible,” he said. “The game’s open. Even with Alcaraz and Sinner and these other guys, it’s not what it used to be.”

Alexander Zverev, ranked just ahead of Alcaraz at No. 2 but without the same major success, expressed similar sentiments ahead of Wimbledon.

Part of the sentiment comes from the fact that even if they’re winning the bulk of the slams, Sinner and Alcaraz are not yet at the point of being a shoo-in for the semis or finals of every big tournament. Alcaraz showed that with his second-round exit here. Djokovic is still wildly talented but has been more uneven, offering the field a glimmer of hope after his worst Grand Slam year since 2017 (and second worst since 2009).

Fritz said Sunday that what encourages him is that he reached the final without playing that well.

Advertisement

“I think it’s really positive for me because I don’t feel like at any specific point in these two weeks … I was playing, like, amazing tennis,” he said. “Maybe it is a bit more open. I don’t think you have to, I don’t know, play unbelievable to go deep in tournaments and contend.”


“When I play good tennis,” Taylor Fritz said, “I think that level is good enough to win.” (Jamie Squire / Getty Images)

Players such as Fritz also haven’t built up the kind of scar tissue with Alcaraz and Sinner that they had with the Big Three. Even if they find themselves losing to them, at least they feel like they have a chance of winning.

With the Big Three, players such as Fritz largely went in with hope rather than expectations. By contrast, before facing Sinner, Fritz said: “I have a feeling I’m going to come out and play really well and win. When I play good tennis, I think that level is good enough to win.”

In the end, Sinner proved too strong. Fritz acknowledged afterward that: “I think that (now) you can find yourself a little deeper in the draws — quarterfinals and stuff — if you just play solid tennis. I still think to beat the top guys, you need to bring your best game.”

And that is the rub. For a player like Fritz to break through and win a slam, he more than likely still has to face Sinner, Alcaraz or Djokovic. And as much as this tournament showed there might be more chances for players outside the elite to reach the quarters, semis and finals, none of those players recorded a landmark win against one of the top three.

Advertisement

Djokovic’s conqueror, Alexei Popyrin, is a rung or two below the group of main challengers, and Botic van de Zandschulp, who defeated Alcaraz, isn’t likely to be at the sharp end of slams anytime soon.

Fritz, though, will come out of this tournament with his standing in the game slightly altered. He spoke after losing to Sinner about how you can only beat what’s in front of you, and the way he navigated the highly stressful and slightly strange semifinal against his good friend and compatriot Tiafoe on Friday seems to have boosted his confidence.

There had always been a competition between those two and the rest of the close group of American players about who would get to a Grand Slam final first. Fritz has done it and, in his mind, while not playing his best. That bodes well for him heading into the Australian Open in January.

But Sunday, Fritz was reminded he’s still a way off from taking that final step. He spoke about how his Plan B of grinding it out works against most players but not those at the very top. He knows he’ll need to add more to his game to take that next step.

Because while the paths to the semis and finals might be getting easier, as long as Alcaraz and Sinner are delivering, the chasing pack still has a way to go.

Advertisement

(Top photo: Kena Betancur / AFP)

Culture

Finding Wisdom in a Poem by Wendy Cope

Published

on

Finding Wisdom in a Poem by Wendy Cope

Advertisement

Where do you turn when you need advice? A chatbot? A life coach? A wise and trusted friend?

How about a poet? Poets may not be famous for making the best life choices, but because they subject the mess of human existence to the discipline of language, they can be as helpful as any therapist or mentor.

Good poets know the rules and when to break them, which is something they can teach the rest of us.

Advertisement

To wit:

Giving advice is a peculiar literary undertaking. It flourishes in certain popular genres — graduation speeches, newspaper columns, country and western songs and poems like this one — but what, in these contexts, is it really for?

Advertisement

I’m thinking of situations when you don’t urgently need help but nonetheless enjoy reading answers to questions you may not have thought to ask. What interests you isn’t the content of the advice — you could get all the life hacks you want from A.I. — so much as the voice of the person dispensing it.

Wendy Cope is an English poet, born in 1945, who has been a fixture of her country’s literary scene since the 1980s. More recently, her short, buoyant poem “The Orange” has been widely memed online, bringing her to the attention of new readers beyond Britain.

Advertisement

Cope favors rhyme, meter, brisk jokes and tart aperçus. She addresses romance, friendship and the petty absurdities of modern life with disarming good humor. The last line of “The Orange” is “I love you. I’m glad I exist.” Somehow she makes it the opposite of cringe.

This isn’t the kind of poetry you would describe as “confessional.” And yet …

Want to learn this poem by heart? We’ll help.

Advertisement

Fill in the missing words below. You can always refer to the reading by A.O. Scott and full
text above.

Question 1/7

Let’s start with the first stanza.

Advertisement

Stop, if the car is going clunk 

Or if the sun has made you blind. 

Dont answer emails when youre drunk. 

Advertisement

Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Culture

Can You Match the Places These Authors Lived With Settings in Their Books?

Published

on

Can You Match the Places These Authors Lived With Settings in Their Books?

A strong sense of place can deeply influence a story, and in some cases, the setting can even feel like a character itself. This week’s literary geography quiz highlights places where authors were born (or lived) that later became locations in their books. To play, just make your selection in the multiple-choice list and the correct answer will be revealed. At the end of the quiz, you’ll find links to the works if you’d like to do further reading.

Continue Reading

Culture

Book Review: ‘America, U.S.A.,’ by Eddie S. Glaude Jr.

Published

on

Book Review: ‘America, U.S.A.,’ by Eddie S. Glaude Jr.

AMERICA, U.S.A.: How Race Shadows the Nation’s Anniversaries, by Eddie S. Glaude Jr.


For those of us in the national memory-keeping business, anniversaries hold near-totemic power. Satisfyingly round units of time, ideally bearing fancy, Latin-derived names, serve as the overburdened pegs on which to hang think pieces and museum exhibits, revisionist documentaries and maudlin public ceremonies. The arbitrary nature of such occasions is precisely what gives them their charge, inviting us to set aside complacency and submit to a comprehensive check-in.

In his new book, “America, U.S.A.,” Eddie S. Glaude Jr. presents an intriguing variation on the genre, seeing the country’s 250th birthday as an anniversary of anniversaries: 50 years since the malaise-ridden, schlock-heavy Bicentennial. A century since the subdued Prohibition-era Sesquicentennial. A century and a half since telegraphed reports of George Armstrong Custer’s defeat by the Lakota and Cheyenne at Little Bighorn rudely interrupted the Gilded Age Republic’s 100th birthday party.

If an anniversary offers a snapshot of a moment, the core of Glaude’s book is an old-timey photo album, a collection of notable episodes from earlier national reckonings, long-ago glances in the mirror. An estimable scholar of Black history, politics and religion at Princeton — best known for “Begin Again,” his 2020 meditation on James Baldwin’s relevance for our times — Glaude focuses, as his subtitle puts it, on “how race shadows the nation’s anniversaries.”

Such celebrations, he contends, have never really been the moments for honest self-reflection they are often advertised to be. Instead, the nation usually shatters the mirror, refusing to accept what it prefers not to see. “American anniversaries are often moments to turn a blind eye to the evils of the past and the present,” Glaude writes, “to suppress the fact of America’s divided soul.”

Advertisement

It’s a clever concept, and, needless to say, perfectly timed. Last year, Glaude notes, the Trump administration executed a hostile takeover of the government’s studiously bipartisan 250th anniversary planning. It is now preparing a program that is certain to conceal more than it reveals about the country ostensibly being celebrated.

Glaude, in no mood for celebration, argues that such omissions and evasions also defined commemorations in the past. In 1875, Frederick Douglass predicted “one grand Centennial hosannah of peace and good will to all the white race of this country.” He was right: The nation reached 100 years old at a crucial moment in the post-Civil War fight over racial equality, with white Northerners ready to give up on Southern Reconstruction. The occasion would help the once-warring sections to reunite around a shared commitment to white supremacy. On May 10, 1876, at the opening of the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia, the police tried to bar Douglass from the grandstand, until a white politician vouched for him.

The 150th anniversary came soon after a resurgent Ku Klux Klan successfully pushed for a restrictive immigration law aimed at keeping America a “Nordic” nation. At the lavishly funded, lightly attended celebrations in Philadelphia, Black veterans of World War I were excluded from marching in the opening parade. A writer with The Associated Negro Press wondered “what was in the breast of those black men who fought to make America safe for Democracy and on Monday stood on the sidelines, forgotten, as the Nordic strode by in all his vain pride.”

By 1976, when the nation marked its Bicentennial, the violence of the ’60s had destroyed any semblance of consensus. Vietnam and Watergate had eroded trust in the government. The commission initially tasked with organizing the anniversary was disbanded amid reports of corruption. Corporations filled the vacuum, Glaude explains, with “star-spangled whoopee cushions; patriotic toilet seats; Liberty hamburgers; red, white and blue beer cans.” The author, around 8 years old at the time, dimly remembers donning a pair of tricolor trousers.

A half-century later, Glaude is refreshingly honest about the depths of his despair. “I do not love America, and never have, especially now,” he writes in one of the more startling opening sentences I’ve read in some time. He dismisses this year’s Semiquincentennial as reaching back “to a storybook America that requires either the banishment of Black people from view or the reduction of our role in the country’s history, so as to affirm America’s ongoing quest to be a more perfect union.”

Advertisement

Undoubtedly true. But Trump doesn’t own the country, at least not yet, nor the 250th anniversary of one of the most radically liberatory and confusingly contradictory events in world history — an inspiration, as Glaude shows, even to critical observers of the American experiment, like Douglass. Far from the revanchist MAGA-palooza in Washington, I suspect this summer’s unasked-for invitation to national soul-searching may surprise us yet.

Despite his despair, Glaude concludes that “the past still offers resources for us to freedom-dream.” So, too, does this book.


AMERICA, U.S.A.: How Race Shadows the Nation’s Anniversaries | By Eddie S. Glaude Jr. | Crown | 270 pp. | $31

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending