Share This Page

High school roundup: Hopewell girls beat South Park in PBC Tournament showdown

| Sunday, Jan. 20, 2013, 12:46 a.m.
Christopher Horner
Hopewell's Cassidy Rizzo works against South Park's Halie Torris during their game Saturday at Ambridge. Christopher Horner | Tribune-Review

In a battle of two of the top teams in Class AAA, the No. 5 Hopewell girls basketball team topped No. 2 South Park, 49-34, at the Pittsburgh Basketball Club Tournament at Ambridge on Saturday night.

Shatori Walker-Kimbrough had 29 points and 10 rebounds to lead Hopewell (14-2). Shelby Lindsay was held without a field goal but was 7 of 8 from the line for South Park (13-2).

Central Valley 72, Montour 32 — Seairra Barrett scored 28 points to lead Class AAA No. 4 Central Valley (14-1) to victory at the Pittsburgh Basketball Club Tournament.

Madi Rowan and Kiana Law added 18 and 16 points, respectively, for Central Valley.

Hampton 51, New Castle 21 — Sara Pilarski scored 12 points and pulled down 18 rebounds as Hampton (11-4, 6-0) defeated New Castle (6-9) in nonsection play.

Beaver 40, Rochester 18 — Lexi Posset's 13 points led Beaver (12-1) to a nonsection win.

Quaker Valley 47, Westinghouse 35 — Sierra Perlik scored 16 points and added seven steals in Quaker Valley's nonsection win. Rachel Smith added 14 points and eight rebounds for Quaker Valley (9-5).

Mt. Lebanon 56, Altoona 44 — In nonsection play, Alex Ventrone scored 18 points to lead Class AAAA No. 2 Mt. Lebanon (14-2) to victory.

Seton-La Salle 61, Villa Maria Academy 39 — Cassidy Walsh scored 15 points as Class A No. 1 Seton-La Salle (14-1) won its seventh straight.

Boys basketball

Vincentian 82, Trinity Christian 51 — Ryan Wolf's 23 points led Class A No. 1 Vincentian (14-1) to victory.

Hempfield 56, Hollidaysburg 49 — In nonsection play, Kason Harrell had 19 points, and Tony Pilato added 12 to lead Hempfield (12-4) to victory.

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.