Teams

BSF:That's My Fault!:Coccomo

2025 NCT Tri Level Women · 3.5 Women Tri Level 1

5 players · average NTRP 3.75 / NORTHERN CONNECTICUT

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 →
Schedule8 played
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Neville / Elizabeth Sauer vs Elyse Post Perez / Christie Kania6-2, 6-1
2025-12-01vs BSF:Tri Us:Fausey/Won 10
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Neville / Rebecca Fausel vs Joy Fausey / Louisa Hogan6-1, 6-1
2025-11-20vs BSF:Jet Sets:Dodd/Lost 01
L#1 DoublesSuzanne Neville / Rebecca Fausel vs Mary Beth Jordan / Chapin Yates4-6, 0-6
2025-11-18vs PRC:Rally Cats:Mauro/Won 10
W#1 DoublesDanielle Coccomo / Patia Haverty vs Sandra Mauro / Martha Tillow6-1, 3-6, 1-0
2025-11-15vs BTC:String Courtette:Walsh/Won 10
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Neville / Elizabeth Sauer vs Julie Walsh / Linda Wright6-3, 6-3
W#1 DoublesDanielle Coccomo / Patia Haverty vs Kim Bandak / Laurie Walls0-6, 6-2, 1-0
2025-09-25vs BTC:Different Strokes:GriffithWon 10
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Neville / Rebecca Fausel vs Genna Griffith / Veronica Grubin6-4, 6-0
2025-09-11vs RFL:Love Hurts:Sullivan/Won 10
W#1 DoublesSuzanne Neville / Danielle Coccomo vs Nan Flanagan / Jennifer Herbek6-1, 6-2
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 standings9 teams · 3.5 Women Tri Level 1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1FV:Game Set Chat:Post Perez/Yaffee0871242
2BSF:That's My Fault!:Coccomo0871445
3BSF:Jet Sets:Dodd/0862663
4RFL:Love Hurts:Sullivan/0853874
5MRC:MRC 3.5 Northern CT Tri Level:Bandak/0844962
6BSF:Tri Us:Fausey/08351176
7BTC:String Courtette:Walsh/08261290
8PRC:Rally Cats:Mauro/08171484
9BTC:Different Strokes:Griffith08171496

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 3.47 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.

3.64
Elizabeth Sauer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.50
Suzanne Neville
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.41
Rebecca Fausel
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.32
Patia Haverty
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Danielle Coccomo
published 3.5
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.

Suzanne Neville + Rebecca Fausel4359% games+4.5% vs expected
Suzanne Neville + Danielle Coccomo6451% games+3.9% vs expected
Patia Haverty + Suzanne Neville181451% games+2.3% vs expected
Elizabeth Sauer + Suzanne Neville404 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
Elizabeth Sauer
7W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
15%85%<1%
3.64
Suzanne Neville
161W–148L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%51%49%
3.50
Rebecca Fausel
36W–46L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%76%24%
3.41
Patia Haverty
81W–110L career · 2 lines in 2025
1%91%9%
3.32
3.5
Danielle Coccomo
45W–36L career · no lines in 2025
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.