Teams

Arfeen/GRETA - 2.5W Fall Singles Tues PM

2026 Piedmont GRETA Fall Singles · 2.5 Women Fall Singles

6 players · average NTRP 2.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule5 upcoming · 4 played
Sep 15 7:30 PM
vs
J Spencer Love Tennis Center
Sep 22 7:30 PM
J Spencer Love Tennis Center
Sep 29 6:00 PM
vs
J Spencer Love Tennis Center
Oct 6 6:00 PM
vs
J Spencer Love Tennis Center
Oct 13 6:00 PM
J Spencer Love Tennis Center
2026-09-08vs Ward 2.5W Fall Singles Tues PMSplit 11
L#1 SinglesTia Opyd vs Allison Chisholm4-6, 4-6
W#2 SinglesCaroline Jackson vs Carla Vilton6-0, 6-1
W#3 SinglesCarrie Hanger vs Erica Harden4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2026-08-25vs Barnes 2.5W Fall Singles Tues PMWon 21
W#1 SinglesTia Opyd vs Julia Saguier7-5, 6-3
W#2 SinglesCaroline Jackson vs Lyndsey Grubb7-6, 6-4
L#3 SinglesSadaf Ahmad vs Heather Aherne1-6, 1-6
2026-08-18vs Ward 2.5W Fall Singles Tues PMWon 21
W#1 SinglesTia Opyd vs Allison Chisholm6-3, 6-4
L#2 SinglesSadaf Ahmad vs Jennie Goforth1-6, 0-6
W#3 SinglesCaroline Jackson vs Carla Vilton6-2, 6-0
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 standings4 teams · 2.5 Women Fall Singles
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Arfeen/GRETA - 2.5W Fall Singles Tues PM1021221
2Barnes 2.5W Fall Singles Tues PM1021322
3Ward 2.5W Fall Singles Tues PM0112425
4Michael/Harden 2.5W Fall Singles Tues PM0112432

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 2.14 estimated across 5 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.

2.51
Tia Opyd
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
2.18
Caroline Jackson
usually #3 Singles 60%, also #2 Singles 40% · published 2.5
2.04
Sadaf Ahmad
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published
2.00
Carrie Hanger
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 2.5
1.99
Annette Bagnoli
published 2.5
Zaira Arfeen
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.

Sadaf Ahmad + Zaira Arfeen134 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.

Tia Opyd
21W–20L career · 6 lines in 2026
0%48%52%
2.51
2.5
Caroline Jackson
9W–20L career · 5 lines in 2026
0%99%1%
2.18
Sadaf Ahmad
1W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.04
2.5
Carrie Hanger
3W–34L career · 1 line in 2026
0%>99%<1%
2.00
2.5
Annette Bagnoli
3W–15L career · type S · no lines in 2026
0%>99%<1%
1.99
Zaira Arfeen
2W–5L career · no lines 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.