ShareThis Page
Knoch bowler places third at state meet |

Knoch bowler places third at state meet

| Saturday, March 19, 2011 12:00 a.m

Knoch sophomore Kevin Hindman advanced to the semifinals of the state high school bowling championships but was defeated by Garden Spot’s Matt Detrick, 257-211, on Friday at Limerick Lanes in Limerick, near Philadelphia.

In the championship match, Baldwin’s Andrew Hartman defeated Detrick, 290-188.

Earlier in the day, Hindman, representing the first-year Knoch team, earned the No. 2 seed in a field of 24 by totalling 1,435 pins in six games. Hartman (1,525) took the No. 1 seed entering head-to-head competition.

State swimming

Fox Chapel freshman Sia Beasley finished 23rd in the 200-yard freestyle and 17th in the 100-yard butterfly at the PIAA Class AAA swimming championships at Bucknell University’s Kinney Natatorium.

Beasley, whose time was 1:56.33, was in the pool when a state record was set in the last of the four heats.

In the second heat, defending champion Danielle Siverling of Downingtown East broke her own PIAA Class AAA record of 1:47.49 with a 1:47.37. Then Oakland Catholic sophomore Leah Smith followed with a 1:47.29 and, in the last preliminary heat, the one with Beasley, freshman Meaghan Raab of Hershey broke the record again with a 1:46.53.

Beasley came back with a better showing in the 100 butterfly with a time of 58.46. She missed 16th place and the final slot in the consolation swim by 0.054 seconds.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.