Teams

4S:Triple Shots Day:CoConis

2021 SCT Tri-Level · Tri-Level Women DAY 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 (1

17 players · average NTRP 3.67 / SOUTHERN 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 →
Schedule5 played
2021-12-03vs 4S:Triple Threat:AmadeoWon 20
W#1 DoublesAnne Castine / Melissa Straub vs Jennifer Amadeo / Kerry Williams3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMari Inagami / Alison Luciano vs Catherine Giff / Suzanna Quinn6-4, 6-2
2021-11-03vs IA:Get a Grip:Hubbard/OttonLost 01
L#3 DoublesMari Inagami / AnneMarie Tartaglia vs Franziska Haight / Christine Holm4-6, 4-6
2021-10-21vs CP:Tri-Harder:das Neves/SparagnaLost 03
L#1 DoublesAnne Castine / Donna Knox vs Meaghan Nolan / Ashley Sullivan2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesShannon Craley / AnneMarie Tartaglia vs Jennifer LaSusa / Malee Sparagna5-7, 3-6
L#3 DoublesMari Inagami / Diane Millas vs Arlene Hagarty / Marjorie Eilertsen2-6, 0-6
2021-10-07vs NC:Triple Threat:Raman/KanterLost 03
L#1 DoublesJamie Coconis / Donna Knox vs ADRIENNE FULK / Elichia Brown4-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesMari Inagami / Janel Downs vs Danielle Muller-Yoo / Carrie Vomacka4-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesNancy Meany / Silvana Buono vs Natasha Moore / Erin Kanter1-6, 5-7
2021-09-23vs MRC:Doubles or Nothing:Rosa/KimLost 02
L#1 DoublesEllen Vicenzi / Shannon Craley vs Julie Mooney / Beckie Ferris1-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesSusan Gregor / Darcy Haskins vs Mina Kim / Betsy Demeyer1-6, 3-6
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 standings6 teams · Tri-Level Women DAY 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 (1
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NC:Triple Threat:Raman/Kanter501326105
2CP:Tri-Harder:das Neves/Sparagna41114893
3MRC:Doubles or Nothing:Rosa/Kim328714114
44S:Triple Threat:Amadeo146920142
5IA:Get a Grip:Hubbard/Otton1441121151
64S:Triple Shots Day:CoConis1431225167

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 3.43 estimated across 10 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.

4.09
Jamie Coconis
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
4.03
Melissa Straub
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.67
Carolyn Noto
published 4
3.60
Meghan Keane
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.44
Anne Castine
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.40
Janel Downs
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.30
Shannon Craley
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Darcy Haskins
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.10
Nancy Meany
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.00
Silvana Buono
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.65
AnneMarie Tartaglia
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
Alison Luciano
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Diane Millas
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Donna Knox
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Ellen Vicenzi
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Mari Inagami
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Susan Gregor
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.

Shannon Craley + Janel Downs6253% games+3.0% vs expected
Donna Knox + Melissa Straub17561% games+2.7% vs expected
Janel Downs + Meghan Keane3446% games+1.4% vs expected
Diane Millas + Mari Inagami1433% games−11.2% vs expected
Silvana Buono + Mari Inagami3255% gamesnot enough data
Shannon Craley + Silvana Buono033 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
Jamie Coconis
59W–37L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%24%76%
4.09
4
Melissa Straub
226W–80L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%41%59%
4.03
4
Carolyn Noto
8W–7L career · no lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
3.67
Meghan Keane
54W–27L career · 1 line in 2022
23%77%<1%
3.60
3.5
Anne Castine
97W–92L career · 2 lines in 2022
<1%67%33%
3.44
Janel Downs
140W–94L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%79%21%
3.40
Shannon Craley
98W–79L career · 6 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.30
3.5
Darcy Haskins
30W–66L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Nancy Meany
63W–70L career · 1 line in 2022
21%78%<1%
3.10
Silvana Buono
49W–74L career · 1 line in 2022
50%50%<1%
3.00
3
AnneMarie Tartaglia
11W–24L career · 2 lines in 2022
13%87%<1%
2.65
Alison Luciano
7W–12L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Diane Millas
32W–44L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Donna Knox
50W–29L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Ellen Vicenzi
0W–2L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Mari Inagami
63W–72L career · 4 lines in 2022
not enough data
Susan Gregor
3W–7L career · no lines in 2022
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.