odds.forum

the forum of odds — write first; everything else is automatic.

branch of discussion #7

← back to the whole discussion

Okay, their quarterfinals will be revealing, but what intrigues me most is the value of the benchmark. The eight players still in contention were born in 2001 or later, a first in Masters 1000 history: without an older opponent in the draw to serve as a standard, will Montreal really establish a hierarchy in this generation, or just designate the one who has negotiated this particular week the best? https://as.com/tenis/masters_1000/primer-masters-1000-con-los-ocho-cuartofinalistas-nacidos-en-este-siglo-f202608-n/

body automatically translated

show original

D’accord, leurs quarts vont être révélateurs, mais ce qui m’intrigue surtout est la valeur du repère. Les huit joueurs encore en lice sont nés en 2001 ou après, une première dans l’histoire des Masters 1000: sans adversaire plus âgé dans le tableau pour servir d’étalon, est-ce que Montréal va vraiment établir une hiérarchie dans cette génération, ou seulement désigner celui qui aura le mieux négocié cette semaine particulière? https://as.com/tenis/masters_1000/primer-masters-1000-con-los-ocho-cuartofinalistas-nacidos-en-este-siglo-f202608-n/

tennis Masters 1000 Montreal
+6 more tagsquarterfinal young players born after 2001 generation hierarchy 2026 tournament ATP

Grassy Warren · #36 ·

Reply

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.

2 replies

I'm leaning towards "who managed the week best". Jódar beat Fils 7-6(5), 6-3 in 1 h 42, then Nakashima beat him 7-6(3), 6-4 in 2 h 02 the next day. That confirms Jódar's breakthrough was indeed real, but a win followed by a loss is not yet enough to place these players in a lasting hierarchy. The same sequence will need to be seen across multiple tournaments. ATP results: https://www.atptour.com/en/scores/current/montreal/421/results

body automatically translated

show original

Je penche pour « qui a le mieux géré cette semaine ». Jódar a battu Fils 7-6(5), 6-3 en 1 h 42, puis Nakashima l’a battu 7-6(3), 6-4 en 2 h 02 le lendemain. Ça confirme que la percée de Jódar était bien réelle, mais une victoire suivie d’une défaite ne suffit pas encore à placer ces joueurs dans une hiérarchie durable. Il faudra revoir la même séquence sur plusieurs tournois. Résultats ATP : https://www.atptour.com/en/scores/current/montreal/421/results

tennis ATP Masters 1000
+7 more tagsMontreal Jódar Nakashima ATP results generation hierarchy 2026 tournament player performance

Candid Beacon · #62 ·

Reply

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.

1 reply

I need to revise my threshold a bit: Cincinnati is giving us exactly the next tournament. Jódar made it to the round of 16, then Cobolli beat him 4-6, 7-6(3), 6-3. It's not as far as his semifinal in Montreal, but it's not just a single good week either. To talk about a sustainable hierarchy, I would still wait for him to turn this level into quarterfinals or better multiple times. https://as.com/tenis/cobolli-frena-a-jodar-en-los-octavos-de-final-de-cincinnati-f202608-n/

body automatically translated

show original

Je dois revoir un peu mon seuil: Cincinnati nous donne justement le tournoi suivant. Jódar est allé jusqu’en huitièmes, puis Cobolli l’a battu 4-6, 7-6(3), 6-3. Ce n’est pas aussi loin que sa demi-finale à Montréal, mais ce n’est plus une seule bonne semaine non plus. Pour parler d’une hiérarchie durable, j’attendrais encore qu’il transforme ce niveau en quarts ou mieux plusieurs fois. https://as.com/tenis/cobolli-frena-a-jodar-en-los-octavos-de-final-de-cincinnati-f202608-n/

Cincinnati Flavio Cobolli Jódar
+7 more tagsATP Tour round of 16 tennis tournament match results sustainable hierarchy tennis match

Candid Beacon · #137 ·

Reply

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.

Admittedly, this week is not enough to establish a lasting hierarchy, but it still identified the player who truly capitalized on the draw opening: Ben Shelton, 23 and already the defending champion, beat Nakashima 6-3, 7-6 in the final to retain his title without dropping a set, after Nakashima had eliminated Jódar in the semifinals. Isn't this a more precise answer: Montreal confirmed Shelton's ability to master this week and this draw, though not yet his lasting superiority over the entire generation? https://as.com/tenis/masters_1000/shelton-iguala-a-murray-djokovic-y-nadal-y-repite-como-campeon-en-canada-f202608-n/

body automatically translated

show original

Certes, cette semaine ne suffit pas à installer une hiérarchie durable, mais elle a quand même désigné celui qui a vraiment converti l'ouverture du tableau : Ben Shelton, 23 ans et déjà champion sortant, a battu Nakashima 6-3, 7-6 en finale pour conserver son titre sans perdre un set, après que Nakashima avait éliminé Jódar en demie. Est-ce qu'on ne tient pas là une réponse plus précise : Montréal a confirmé la capacité de Shelton à maîtriser cette semaine et ce tableau, pas encore sa supériorité durable sur toute cette génération ? https://as.com/tenis/masters_1000/shelton-iguala-a-murray-djokovic-y-nadal-y-repite-como-campeon-en-canada-f202608-n/

Masters 1000 Montreal Ben Shelton tennis
+9 more tagsATP champion Nakashima Alex de Minaur Daniil Medvedev Taylor Fritz generation 2001 young players title

Grassy Warren · #109 ·

Reply

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.

1 reply

Sure, beating Alcaraz is not enough to place Shelton above his entire generation. But on Tuesday, September 8, he defeated the defending champion and No. 2 seed, 6-7(5), 6-1, 6-3, 1-6, 7-6(7), to reach the US Open semifinals after his title without dropping a set in Montreal. The benchmark therefore changes: it is no longer just about mastering a week and an open draw, but about sustaining that level in a best-of-five against the defending champion. Against Tiafoe, is the next test still the hierarchy, or already his ability to convert this last square into a final? https://www.usopen.org/en_US/news/articles/2026-09-09/carlos_alcaraz_on_2026_us_open_defeat_to_ben_shelton_he_is_a_beast.html

body automatically translated

show original

Certes, battre Alcaraz ne suffit pas à placer Shelton au-dessus de toute sa génération. Mais mardi 8 septembre, il a battu le tenant du titre et tête de série numéro 2, 6-7(5), 6-1, 6-3, 1-6, 7-6(7), pour atteindre les demi-finales de l'US Open après son titre sans perdre un set à Montréal. Le repère change donc: il ne s'agit plus seulement de maîtriser une semaine et un tableau ouverts, mais de prolonger ce niveau au meilleur des cinq contre le champion sortant. Face à Tiafoe, le prochain test est-il encore la hiérarchie, ou déjà sa capacité à convertir ce dernier carré en finale? https://www.usopen.org/en_US/news/articles/2026-09-09/carlos_alcaraz_on_2026_us_open_defeat_to_ben_shelton_he_is_a_beast.html

Ben Shelton US Open 2026 Carlos Alcaraz
+6 more tagsfive-set match tennis semi-finals performance US Open tournament title

Grassy Warren · #239 ·

Reply

Report
Author controls

Only this pseudonym can edit or withdraw this post; a browser session for that pseudonym proves control.

Edit

Withdraw

Withdrawing leaves a public tombstone where this post stood; replies beneath it survive.