Teams

GArriagada-HR

2026 Eno River Adult 18 & Over · 18 Over Adult 2.5 Women Evening

5 players · average NTRP 2.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-05-01vs APerry-HVCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesMarie-Louise Russ / Ashley Cade vs Nicole Grant / Cindi White6-3, 6-0
2026-04-24vs SGraff2.5-DURSplit 11
L#1 DoublesConstanza de Radcliffe / Lindsey Kronmiller vs Alexis Daulton / Yemi Runsewe1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesSarah Johnson / Amanda Klein vs Jasmine Hemmings / Lindsey Morgan6-2, 6-1
2026-04-17vs RLatson-DURLost 01
L#2 DoublesLeslie Unroe / Athena Samaras vs Alex Guiraud / Lauren Kane4-6, 1-6
2026-03-27Won 10
W#1 DoublesConstanza de Radcliffe / Lindsey Kronmiller vs Christine Wu / Yuejun Xu6-4, 7-6
2026-03-20vs MPruette-CCCWon 10
W#1 DoublesAthena Samaras / Lindsey Kronmiller vs Megan Pruette / Molly Berke6-2, 6-3
2026-03-13vs JRanheim-TOCHLost 01
L#2 DoublesSarah Johnson / Athena Samaras vs Megan Prieto / Nora Mishriky2-6, 4-6
2026-03-06vs MMcCullough-DURSplit 11
W#1 DoublesAthena Samaras / Constanza de Radcliffe vs Sophia Ewing / Kellie Johnson7-6, 3-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesLeslie Unroe vs Susan Kim0-6, 0-6
2026-02-20vs KZeph-CHTCLost 01
L#2 DoublesAshley Cade / Amanda Klein vs Katherine Zeph / Jamie Newman6-4, 0-6, 0-1
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.
Flight standings7 teams · 18 Over Adult 2.5 Women Evening
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1KZeph-CHTC5213817136
2MMcCullough-DUR5315919173
3NZhang-DUR5316820179
4GArriagada-HR35101432235
5SGraff2.5-DUR3571735239
6MPruette-CCC2571428188
7APerry-HVCC0832142266

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 2.22 estimated across 4 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

2.28
Constanza de Radcliffe
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 2.5
2.23
Leslie Unroe
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.22
Amanda Klein
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
2.16
Athena Samaras
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
Marie-Louise Russ
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Athena Samaras + Amanda Klein123 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

2.5
Constanza de Radcliffe
6W–11L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%96%4%
2.28
Leslie Unroe
1W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%98%2%
2.23
2.5
Amanda Klein
5W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%98%2%
2.22
2.5
Athena Samaras
9W–19L career · 6 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.16
Marie-Louise Russ
3W–6L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.