“If I couldn’t beat him then I don’t deserve to be in semis” : Fritz ends debate on lucky loser in main draws

Once Rafael Nadal pulled out of the Wimbledon semi-finals, many wanted Taylor Fritz, the player he beat, to replace the Spaniard in the last four

Taylor Fritz of the U.S. at Wimbledon 2022 Image Credit: AI / Reuters / Panoramic

Haresh Ramchandani

July 8, 2022

Rafael Nadal’s decision to withdraw from the Wimbledon semi-finals against Nick Kyrgios revived an old debate in the online tennis world – should players withdrawing mid-way through a tournament be replaced by the player they defeated in the previous round?

Many fans, disappointed with Nadal’s withdrawal and the prospect of watching just one semi-final at the most prestigious tournament in the world, were wondering if Taylor Fritz, the man that Nadal defeated to get to the semis, should take his spot against Kyrgios in the last four.

Christopher Clarey, one of tennis’ most notable journalists who writes for The New York Times,, was among those who were wondering how to deal with such a scenario as he tweeted that the concept of a lucky loser after the first rounds should be explored, something that Pam Shriver, a former world No 3 in singles and top-ranked doubles player, was also pondering over.

It happens so rarely, but I still think it's worth exploring. When a player withdraws this late in a Grand Slam or before a major tour final, the beaten player should be able to take the slot. In this case Fritz would play Kyrgios as a "lucky loser".

The show must go on
— Christopher Clarey 🇺🇸 🇫🇷 🇪🇸 (@christophclarey) July 7, 2022

I feel for Taylor Fritz. Should tennis re-examine the lucky loser rule’s scope?
— Pam Shriver (@PHShriver) July 7, 2022

While there was some support for such an idea, especially from a section of tennis fans, former world No 1 Andy Roddick was among those who were dead set against it.

https://twitter.com/andyroddick/status/1545182726130524160

Not much more absurd than a lucky loser entering after losing in qualifying. The principle already exists
— Christopher Clarey 🇺🇸 🇫🇷 🇪🇸 (@christophclarey) July 7, 2022

One of the reasons that some wanted the lucky loser support gained some support was the high price for the men’s semi-final ticket at Wimbledon on Friday, which were in the range of 200 pounds for the two semi-finals.

With the second semi-final being replaced by women’s doubles matches, may found the 200 pounds price exorbitant for one men’s semi-final match.

The All England Club did address some of those concerns and offered a full refund for anyone who wished to get one if they applied before midnight on Friday.

Fritz says he is not looking for handouts

Fritz, the player who found himself unknowingly involved in the debate, had the last word on the debate though, as the American let everyone know that he was not looking for any handouts.

“Nah not looking for handouts, if I couldn’t beat him then I don’t deserve to be in semis. simple as that”.

And Tennis Major’s own Simon Cambers was among those who pointed out that allowing lucky losers could also increase avenues for match-fixing.

One other thing about the lucky loser main draw debate, as tempting as it might be to allow it, it could open up another route to match-fixing. As unlikely as it may seem, players could deliberately lose, if they knew that the opponent would pull out later.
— Simon Cambers (@scambers73) July 8, 2022

For now, the debate has been put to rest. But you can be rest assured that it will rear it’s head again the next time the same scenario plays out again.