Obremski, four others come up short at PGA qualifier | TribLIVE.com
Other Local

Obremski, four others come up short at PGA qualifier

Paul Schofield
1652315_web1_PTR-OPENqualifier08-051316
Christopher Horner | Tribune-Review
Daniel Obremski of Irwin watches his tee shot on Hole 18 during the U.S. Open local qualifier Thursday, May 12, 2016, at Butler Country Club.

Dan Obremski won’t be playing in this week’s PGA Greenbrier Classic at the Greenbrier Resort in West Virginia.

The Irwin native and Penn-Trafford graduate and four other Pittsburgh golfers came up short at Monday’s qualifier at Glade Springs Resort in Daniels, W.Va. There were 72 golfers competing for four spots.

The four qualifiers were Steve Allen (6-under 66), Ban Shintaro (66) and Andrew Novak and Conrad Shindler, each shooting a 68. They needed a playoff to edge out three other players.

Obremski, who shot a 3-under par 68 during the pre-qualifier Friday, shot a 2-over 73.

Other Pittsburgh area golfers who failed to qualify were Hermitage’s Matt Gurska (71), Butler’s Ron McClellan (80) and Pittsburgh’s Spencer Mellon (83). Wexford’s Gene Walter withdrew during the round.

Paul Schofield is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Paul by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Sports | Other Local
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.