No luck for area teams in AA golf semis
It wasn't really a banner day for the local teams that participated in the two WPIAL Class AA Boys' Team Golf Semifinals.
However, for players like Yough's Alex Patricio and Charleroi's Gunnar Riley, the day wasn't a total loss.
Yough, Charleroi and California all took part in the semifinals and neither team advanced to the team championships, scheduled for Thursday on the Gold Course at Cedarbrook Golf Course.
However, in the semifinal at Indian Run, while California and Yough finished seventh and eighth, respectively, Patricio was the overall low golfer, shooting a 3-under par 687.
Patricio took medalist honors over Waynesburg's Loren Dukate, who was second with an even-par round of 71.
At Donegal Highlands, Charleroi finished ninth in the 10-team field. However, Riley shot a more than respectable 76 on the par-72 course.
Individually, Riley finished tied for third with Kittanning's Jordan Klodowski, four strokes behind medalist Matt Moore of Winchester Thurston, who shot 72, and three strokes behind Sewickley Academy's Keenan Hickton, who had a 73.
At Indian Run, Burgettstown finished first with a tem score of 417, followed by qualifiers Freeport (418) and Shenango (425).
California, which had a team score of 447, was led by Michael Luketich with an 82.
Yough finished with a team score of 449.
At Donegal Highlands, three teams qualified, including Sewickley Academy (387), Neshannock (417) and Winchester Thurston (428).
Charleroi's team score was 468.
For Charleroi, Chris Schaum had a 92, Mike Kondratik a 95, Steve Iacovino a 97 and Josh Sidary a 108.
Cedarbrook will also host the WPIAL Class AAA Boys' Team Golf Championship on Thursday.
Jeff Oliver is a sports editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-684-2666 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
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 â 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.