Franklin Regional, Penn-Trafford tennis teams advance to WPIAL tournaments
Franklin Regional freshman Natalia Perry made a splash in this year's WPIAL singles tournament, but none of the local teams had the same luck in doubles.
Perry and senior teammate Lauren Bailey advanced to the quarterfinals of the WPIAL Class AAA doubles tournament, which was the deepest progression of any of the Section 1-AAA pairs last Thursday at Norwin.
Despite being section champs, Perry and Bailey were seeded seventh for the district tournament, which pitted them against 10th-seeded Vida Komer and Jen Holcombe of Peters Township.
Franklin Regional battled through the tough opening match and avoided a tiebreaker by taking the final game for an 11-9 win.
That moved Perry and Bailey into a quarterfinal against North Allegheny's Kylie Isaacs and Maddy Adams — the No. 2 seed.
The Panthers' team had its run end there with a 10-6 defeat.
The other two teams representing Section 1-AAA both were eliminated in the first round.
Penn-Trafford sophomore Charlotte Vertes and senior Alexis Ryan, the section runners-up, were eliminated in their first-round match against Marlys Bridgham and Laura Feger of Pine-Richland, 10-1.
Hempfield's Madison DeBone and Carly Bryan, the section's third-place team, fell in the opening round against Isaacs and Adams, 10-1.
The teams from both section-champion Franklin Regional and Penn-Trafford will be in the WPIAL Class AAA team tournament, which was scheduled to begin as early as today.
Matt Grubba is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-388-5830 or 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.