Pine-Richland tennis team looks good early
Although the weather has other coaches having fits about lack of practice time and lost preseason games, Pine-Richland's Janet Chappell and the tennis team are right on schedule. Having the good fortune of playing at Lakevue Tennis Club, the Rams have been doing pretty well early on this season.
Pine-Richland lost, 3-2, to perennial power North Allegheny and has yet to face Hampton — a team Chappell thinks highly of. But she feels her team is stronger than last year.
Chappell expects Caleb Kramer to win each time out at No. 1 singles.
“Caleb is a good No. 1 player,” Chappell said.
Brett O'Donnell is a strong No. 2 and a fourth-year starter for the Rams.
At No. 3, Brian Beck, another four-year starter, will help the Rams from an experience standpoint.
Chappell called her doubles teams interesting but likes what she has seen for the most part.
At No. 1 doubles, Rashab Humar and Danny McMurry have teamed up to do some good things. Chappell said Humar is a fine tennis player, but sometimes he has a tendency to float some volleys back to the opposing team. This habit sometimes frustrates Chappell.
“I told him he has to run a lap for every floating volley he sends back,” she said.
The No. 2 doubles team consists of Nikhil Sangh and Jacob Jeanson, who moved from Texas.
“The team is playing well,” Chappell said. “NA is always a tough out, especially early. Not all of our players are tournament players, but we work and tend to peak at the end of the season. That is what we hope for.”
Jerry Clark is a sports editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-779-6979 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.