hard Elo: Ben Shelton 1925, Carlos Alcaraz 2120. 195 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Ben Shelton vs Carlos Alcaraz match analysis →DAILY ATP & CHALLENGER RESEARCH · SUNDAY, 8 NOVEMBER 2026
Today's tennis matchups
An independent daily overview of 40 matches: surface ratings, rankings, form indicators, conditions and the statistical challenges that could shape each contest. This editorial page does not publish or imply CourtValue Official Picks.
40matches analysed
Paris ATPFRANCE · HARDHARD4matches
hard Elo: Casper Ruud 1864, Nuno Borges 1775. 89 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Casper Ruud vs Nuno Borges match analysis →hard Elo: Casper Ruud 1864, Carlos Alcaraz 2120. 256 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Casper Ruud vs Carlos Alcaraz match analysis →
hard Elo: Luca Van Assche 1716, Ben Shelton 1925. 209 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Luca Van Assche vs Ben Shelton match analysis →Stockholm ATP QualifyingSWEDEN · HARDHARD9matches
hard Elo: Olle Wallin 1313, Lorenzo Sonego 1648. 336 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Olle Wallin vs Lorenzo Sonego match analysis →
hard Elo: Jacob Fearnley 1692, Alexander Shevchenko 1571. 120 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Jacob Fearnley vs Alexander Shevchenko match analysis →
hard Elo: Nikoloz Basilashvili 1674, Borna Gojo 1613. 61 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Nikoloz Basilashvili vs Borna Gojo match analysis →
hard Elo: Damir Dzumhur 1617, Inaki Montes De La Torre 1560. 58 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Damir Dzumhur vs Inaki Montes De La Torre match analysis →
hard Elo: Nikoloz Basilashvili 1674, Francesco Passaro 1613. 61 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Nikoloz Basilashvili vs Francesco Passaro match analysis →hard Elo: Inaki Montes De La Torre 1560, Lorenzo Sonego 1648. 89 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Inaki Montes De La Torre vs Lorenzo Sonego match analysis →hard Elo: Viktor Durasovic 1302, Alexander Shevchenko 1571. 269 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Viktor Durasovic vs Alexander Shevchenko match analysis →
hard Elo: Adrian Mannarino 1707, Toby Samuel 1687. The narrow rating gap points to a finely balanced matchup.
Adrian Mannarino vs Toby Samuel match analysis →hard Elo: Mika Brunold 1586, Borna Gojo 1613. The narrow rating gap points to a finely balanced matchup.
Mika Brunold vs Borna Gojo match analysis →Stockholm ATPSWEDEN · HARDHARD2matches
hard Elo: Thiago Agustin Tirante 1683, Jaume Munar 1786. 104 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Thiago Agustin Tirante vs Jaume Munar match analysis →
hard Elo: Elias Ymer 1447, Juan Manuel Cerundolo 1687. 240 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Elias Ymer vs Juan Manuel Cerundolo match analysis →Bratislava 2 ChallengerSLOVAKIA · HARDHARD3matches
hard Elo: Dalibor Svrcina 1690, Jurij Rodionov 1578. 112 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Dalibor Svrcina vs Jurij Rodionov match analysis →
hard Elo: Jerome Kym 1682, Jurij Rodionov 1578. 105 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Jerome Kym vs Jurij Rodionov match analysis →
hard Elo: Jerome Kym 1682, Matej Dodig 1521. 161 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Jerome Kym vs Matej Dodig match analysis →Charlottesville ChallengerUSA · HARDHARD4matches
hard Elo: Marcos Giron 1624, Clement Chidekh 1666. 42 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Marcos Giron vs Clement Chidekh match analysis →hard Elo: Clement Chidekh 1666, Stefan Kozlov 1378. 288 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Clement Chidekh vs Stefan Kozlov match analysis →hard Elo: Aidan Mayo 1492, Andres Andrade 1523. The narrow rating gap points to a finely balanced matchup.
Aidan Mayo vs Andres Andrade match analysis →hard Elo: Stefan Kozlov 1378, Aidan Mayo 1492. 113 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Stefan Kozlov vs Aidan Mayo match analysis →Costa do Sauipe ChallengerBRAZIL · CLAYCLAY4matches
clay Elo: Thiago Seyboth Wild 1639, Joao Lucas Reis Da Silva 1557. 82 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Thiago Seyboth Wild vs Joao Lucas Reis Da Silva match analysis →
clay Elo: Facundo Diaz Acosta 1714, Thiago Seyboth Wild 1639. 75 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Facundo Diaz Acosta vs Thiago Seyboth Wild match analysis →
clay Elo: Thiago Seyboth Wild 1639, Camilo Ugo Carabelli 1686. 47 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Thiago Seyboth Wild vs Camilo Ugo Carabelli match analysis →
clay Elo: Gonzalo Bueno 1463, Camilo Ugo Carabelli 1686. 223 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Gonzalo Bueno vs Camilo Ugo Carabelli match analysis →Knoxville Challenger QualifyingUSA · HARDHARD2matches
hard Elo: Andrew Fenty 1249, Kenta Miyoshi 1374. 125 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Andrew Fenty vs Kenta Miyoshi match analysis →
hard Elo: Giles Hussey 1477, Kaylan Bigun 1283. 194 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Giles Hussey vs Kaylan Bigun match analysis →Orleans Challenger QualifyingFRANCE · HARDHARD3matches
hard Elo: Luca Nardi 1556, Alexander Donski 1435. 121 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Luca Nardi vs Alexander Donski match analysis →hard Elo: Buvaysar Gadamauri 1392, Vadym Ursu 1217. 175 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Buvaysar Gadamauri vs Vadym Ursu match analysis →
hard Elo: Luka Pavlovic 1446, Hugo Grenier 1458. The narrow rating gap points to a finely balanced matchup.
Luka Pavlovic vs Hugo Grenier match analysis →Taipei ChallengerTAIWAN · HARDHARD3matches
hard Elo: Coleman Wong 1698, Yosuke Watanuki 1507. 191 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Coleman Wong vs Yosuke Watanuki match analysis →hard Elo: Yosuke Watanuki 1507, Jan Kumstat 1463. 44 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Yosuke Watanuki vs Jan Kumstat match analysis →hard Elo: Yuta Shimizu 1388, Jan Kumstat 1463. 75 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Yuta Shimizu vs Jan Kumstat match analysis →Taranto ChallengerITALY · HARDHARD3matches
hard Elo: Felix Gill 1460, Matteo Martineau 1423. 37 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Felix Gill vs Matteo Martineau match analysis →
hard Elo: Carlo Alberto Caniato 1323, Kilian Feldbausch 1354. The narrow rating gap points to a finely balanced matchup.
Carlo Alberto Caniato vs Kilian Feldbausch match analysis →hard Elo: Kilian Feldbausch 1354, Matteo Martineau 1423. 69 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Kilian Feldbausch vs Matteo Martineau match analysis →Villa Maria ChallengerARGENTINA · CLAYCLAY3matches
clay Elo: Federico Coria 1453, Genaro Alberto Olivieri 1430. The narrow rating gap points to a finely balanced matchup.
Federico Coria vs Genaro Alberto Olivieri match analysis →clay Elo: Juan Manuel La Serna 1487, Genaro Alberto Olivieri 1430. 57 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Juan Manuel La Serna vs Genaro Alberto Olivieri match analysis →clay Elo: Juan Manuel La Serna 1487, Nicolas Kicker 1432. 56 points separate the players, making surface adaptation a central question.
Juan Manuel La Serna vs Nicolas Kicker match analysis →