Teams

Rodriguez/Pitts 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues PM

2026 Piedmont Tri-Level 18 & Over · 4.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
W#1 DoublesCarter Juergens / Elizabeth Jones vs Genoveva Willocks / Kelley Champion6-2, 1-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesSara Adamson / Tiana Pitts vs Erin Cockman / Kelly Glick2-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesGinger Ballard / Jessica Neal vs Jennifer Klein / Diane Puckett6-3, 6-0
W#1 DoublesTiana Pitts / Elizabeth Jones vs Elia Mavronikolas / silvina piotti6-3, 7-5
L#2 DoublesHeidi Gingerich / Marlene Fraticelli vs Tiffany Weeks / Jasmine Johnson4-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesGinger Ballard / Rosa Chica vs Andrea Spencer / Brandye Peterson6-4, 6-2
L#1 DoublesCarolyn Pellerin / Claudia Rodriguez vs Alice Procter / Caroline Stowers3-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesAmy Bunch / Elizabeth Jones vs Emily Wilson / Heidi Boswell6-3, 6-1
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Jones / Carter Juergens vs Tracy Harlan / Erin Huffines6-1, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesClaudia Rodriguez / Heidi Gingerich vs Deirdre Hjelt / Natalie Harris1-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesGinger Ballard / Deb Budler vs Jane Forbes Fields / Allison Garrett4-6, 4-6
L#1 DoublesHeidi Gingerich / Carolyn Pellerin vs Kristin Williamson / Madison Bowen0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Jones / Sara Adamson vs Lynda Guarnieri / Kate Augustine3-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesGinger Ballard / Sloane McPeak vs Shelly Tuhro / Alexis Ganesh6-4, 7-6
W#1 DoublesCarter Juergens / Elizabeth Jones vs Chetana Honnarayanahalli / Kara Ray6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesSara Adamson / Tiana Pitts vs Crystal Mercado / Courtney Jones6-7, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesSloane McPeak / Deb Budler vs Roxanne Thomas / Rebekah East6-7
L#1 DoublesCarter Juergens / Carolyn Pellerin vs Joy Martin / Melissa Goodman3-6, 6-1, 0-1
W#2 DoublesAmy Bunch / Sara Adamson vs Ariane Cox / Marie Dunn6-4, 6-7, 1-0
W#3 DoublesGinger Ballard / Jessica Neal vs Clara Gonzalez Flores / Gayle Taylordean4-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#1 DoublesCarter Juergens / Claudia Rodriguez vs Erin Cockman / Hannah Higgins4-6, 6-1, 0-1
L#2 DoublesTiana Pitts / Elizabeth Jones vs Denise Butler / Julie McPherson2-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#3 DoublesGinger Ballard / Sloane McPeak vs Jennifer Klein / Diane Puckett6-0, 6-1
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 standings8 teams · 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Williamson 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues PM6218615154
2Goy 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues PM6218615170
3Hunt 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues PM53141023189
4McPherson/Higgins 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues53101431223
5Rodriguez/Pitts 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues PM44131128209
6Dagger-Wilson 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues PM3591531217
7Goodman 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues PM2681635249
8Mavronikolas 18s TriLevel 4.0/3.5/3.0W Tues PM1761837254

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 3.21 estimated across 13 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.

3.83
Carter Juergens
usually #1 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.60
Carolyn Pellerin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.35
Lesley Rossato
published
3.34
Tiana Pitts
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.28
Ginger Ballard
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.25
Sara Adamson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.20
Sloane McPeak
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
3.17
Marlene Fraticelli
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.16
Amy Bunch
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.15
Heidi Gingerich
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.95
Jessica Neal
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
2.83
Deb Budler
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.64
Rosa Chica
usually #3 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.

Tiana Pitts + Amy Bunch5547% games+5.5% vs expected
Ginger Ballard + Sloane McPeak314 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.

4
Carter Juergens
5W–4L career · 8 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.83
4
Carolyn Pellerin
8W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.60
Lesley Rossato
6W–5L career · no lines in 2026
87%13%<1%
3.35
Tiana Pitts
38W–24L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%88%11%
3.34
3
Ginger Ballard
93W–38L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%1%99%
3.28
Sara Adamson
25W–14L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%95%3%
3.25
Sloane McPeak
34W–9L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%6%94%
3.20
Marlene Fraticelli
1W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
10%90%1%
3.17
3.5
Amy Bunch
31W–36L career · 2 lines in 2026
11%88%<1%
3.16
3.5
Heidi Gingerich
22W–34L career · 3 lines in 2026
13%87%<1%
3.15
Jessica Neal
18W–12L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%64%36%
2.95
3
Deb Budler
4W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%89%10%
2.83
Rosa Chica
9W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
13%86%<1%
2.64

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.