Geibel siblings claim WPIAL titles in 50 free
Geibel Catholic senior John Paul Zimcosky watched in amazement from the side of Pitt's Trees Pool as his younger sister, sophomore Emily Zimcosky, set a WPIAL record in the 50-yard freestyle Thursday.
He immediately followed her with a win in the same event.
Emily Zimcosky's time of 23.13 seconds edged the mark of 23.56 that had stood since 2000.
“Usually when I see her swim, I'm in line with all the guys,” John Paul Zimcosky said. “All of a sudden, I see her 23.13 up on the wall, and the guys are going, ‘I cant even go that time.' ”
Luckily, Zimcosky can go faster, as he finished in 21.60.
“I have her in the sprint events,” the older brother said with a laugh, “but that's about it.”
Multiple Connellsville swimmers were in action Thursday.
Alyson Urie finished 23rd in the 200 IM (2:16.26), Colin Mastowski was 27th in the 100 fly (56.44) and the girls 200 free relay finished 26th (1:47.34).
The top three finishers from all Class AAA events advance to the PIAA meet March 12-15 at Bucknell University's Kinney Natatorium.
Class AA swimmers get four girls and five boys entrants to states.
Six WPIAL records fell in the early session: North Allegheny in the girls 200 medley relay and Upper St. Clair in the boys portion of the event; North Allegheny's Zach Buerger in the 200 IM; Mt. Lebanon's Katie Ford in the 50 free; Upper St. Clair's Ryan Dudzinski in the 100 fly; and Upper St. Clair in the boys 200 free relay.
North Allegheny held a 1 1⁄2-point lead over Upper St. Clair in the boys team standings, 206-204 1⁄2, and the Tigers girls raced to a big lead with 271 points.
The West Allegheny girls led Class AA with 149 points, and the Mars boys were tops with 116.
Gary Horvath is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at email@example.com.
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.