FC swim team gets pair of victories
The Fox Chapel High School swim team picked up a pair of wins against Shaler on Dec. 18 and split with Seneca Valley on Dec. 20.
At Shaler, the boys won by a score of 89-80 and the girls won 92-48.
For the boys, Scott Sterrett won the 200 freestyle and the 100 backstroke, while Zihan Su took first in the 50 freestyle and the 100 breaststroke.
Noah Cagley also took first in two events as he won the 100 butterfly and 500 freestyle.
Ryan Foster won the 200 intermediate.
On the girl's side, Sia Beasley won the 50 and 100 freestyle. Anna Mucci won the 200 freestyle, Franny Dean was first in the 100 butterfly and Amanda Todd won the 100 backstroke.
Against Seneca Valley, Beasley won the 200 freestyle and 100 backstroke and Dean won the 200 intermediate and 100 breaststroke.
Mucci won the 100 butterfly and Maura Clark won the 500 freestyle.
The boys had six individual first place finishes led by Su in the 200 intermediate and the 100 backstroke and Cagley in the 50 and 100 freestyle.
Sterrett won the 100 butterfly and Dante Cordaro took first in the 100 breaststroke.
Fox Chapel fell to Plum, 37-21 on Dec. 19 in a Section 3B-AAA match.
Jared Rice had a pin at 113 for the Foxes.
Austin Pisano picked up a win at 120, Tyler Heasley won at 160, Jon Fisher gained a forfeit win at 195 and Tyler Lever was the winner at 285.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.