Teams

SCC Coon

2025 Richmond Tri-Level Weekday · Richmond Tri-Level Weekday 4.0, 3.5, 3.0

15 players · average NTRP 3.25 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-09-12vs SCC GrayLost 01
L#2 DoublesMary Knick / Andrea Hill vs Brooke Gilbert / Regina Perkinson6-4, 4-6, 0-1
2025-08-26vs MTC PattersonWon 10
W#2 DoublesDonna Jamison / Mary Knick vs Jeannie Langnau / Kathleen Laroche6-1, 6-2
2025-08-15vs HCC Mangin/KerseyWon 10
W#2 DoublesAnnmarie Strachan / Mary Knick vs Lisa Frazier / Stacey Haug6-7, 6-4, 1-0
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 standings for Richmond Tri-Level Weekday 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.16 estimated across 14 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.

3.82
Laney Hyatt
published
3.69
Michelle Nelson
published
3.60
Kendall Consolvo
published
3.53
Becky McNeer
published 3.5
3.34
Mary Knick
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.27
Parker Coon
published
3.25
Donna Jamison
published 3.5
3.10
Erin Garrett
published 3.5
3.05
Andrea Hill
published 3
3.04
Annmarie Strachan
published 3.5
2.92
Betsy Gibson
published 3
2.73
Katie Gilbert
published
2.49
Kenica Eggan
published
2.36
Christina Sursa
published 2.5
Tiffany Jeremiah
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.

Becky McNeer + Donna Jamison6160% games+11.7% vs expected
Kendall Consolvo + Parker Coon0733% games−5.8% vs expected
Michelle Nelson + Laney Hyatt213 matchesnot enough data
Mary Knick + Becky McNeer123 matchesnot enough data
Erin Garrett + Laney Hyatt213 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.

Laney Hyatt
21W–11L career · no lines in 2025
1%91%8%
3.82
Michelle Nelson
12W–24L career · no lines in 2025
8%92%1%
3.69
Kendall Consolvo
2W–11L career · no lines in 2025
22%78%<1%
3.60
3.5
Becky McNeer
30W–20L career · no lines in 2025
<1%42%58%
3.53
3.5
Mary Knick
204W–130L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%89%11%
3.34
Parker Coon
2W–9L career · no lines in 2025
96%4%<1%
3.27
3.5
Donna Jamison
20W–17L career · no lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Erin Garrett
16W–17L career · no lines in 2025
23%77%<1%
3.10
3
Andrea Hill
20W–20L career · no lines in 2025
<1%34%66%
3.05
3.5
Annmarie Strachan
8W–15L career · no lines in 2025
38%62%<1%
3.04
3
Betsy Gibson
17W–12L career · no lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
2.92
Katie Gilbert
12W–20L career · no lines in 2025
4%94%2%
2.73
Kenica Eggan
4W–12L career · no lines in 2025
54%46%<1%
2.49
2.5
Christina Sursa
2W–12L career · no lines in 2025
0%86%14%
2.36
Tiffany Jeremiah
2W–1L 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.