Peters Township native Alison Riske loses in Wuhan Open final | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World Sports

Peters Township native Alison Riske loses in Wuhan Open final

Associated Press
1738893_web1_gtr-riske-092919
Getty Images
Alison Riske returns a shot against Aryna Sabalenka during the Wuhan Open singles final at Optics Valley International Tennis Center on September 28, 2019 in Wuhan, China.

WUHAN, China — Aryna Sabalenka beat unseeded Alison Riske, 6-3, 3-6, 6-1, in the Wuhan Open final on Saturday to become the tournament’s first back-to-back champion.

Sabalenka joins Petra Kvitova as the only other two-time winner at Wuhan.

“I can’t believe that I defend this title,” Sabalenka said. “I can’t believe it’s happened.”

The ninth-seeded Belarusian won five of the first six games in the first set.

Riske, a Peters Township native, rallied in the second, withstanding nine aces to level the match, but Sabalenka regained control in the decider.

“Third set I came out like ‘This is a final, try to do everything you can. Just one match to go. Just do your best.’ I was just focusing on my game, focusing on each point,” Sabalenka said.

Sabalenka has now won three of her four titles in China, including the Shenzhen Open earlier this year in which she also defeated Riske in a three-set final.

Despite losing, Riske is set to enter the top 30 rankings for the first time in her career at age 29.

Categories: Sports | US-World
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.