Clay's Almanac

Vince Chambers

WAS 79.1–83.6 ATL 81.9–86.2 Overlap 1.67 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.4) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.5–83.2 ATL 82.2–85.8 Overlap 0.97 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.4) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.7–83.0 ATL 82.5–85.6 Overlap 0.52 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.4) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.9–82.8 ATL 82.6–85.4 Overlap 0.17 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.4) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 80.1–82.7 ATL 82.8–85.3 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.4) — by 2.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic: -18.16
p-value: 1.84e-41

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Reg

WAS 78.5–83.7 ATL 81.5–86.4 Overlap 2.21 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 78.9–83.3 ATL 81.9–86.0 Overlap 1.4 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.2–83.0 ATL 82.1–85.7 Overlap 0.87 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.4–82.8 ATL 82.3–85.5 Overlap 0.47 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.6–82.6 ATL 82.5–85.4 Overlap 0.13 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math

Model: Reg (#2)
t-statistic: -16.55
p-value: 4.20e-37

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Dr. Wallace

WAS 79.2–83.3 ATL 81.6–86.3 Overlap 1.78 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.3) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.5–83.0 ATL 81.9–85.9 Overlap 1.06 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.3) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.7–82.8 ATL 82.2–85.7 Overlap 0.59 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.3) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.9–82.6 ATL 82.4–85.5 Overlap 0.24 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.3) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 80.0–82.5 ATL 82.5–85.3 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.3) — by 2.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic: -17.68
p-value: 6.22e-40

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Kevin

WAS 79.0–83.5 ATL 81.9–86.2 Overlap 1.58 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.4–83.1 ATL 82.2–85.8 Overlap 0.88 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.6–82.9 ATL 82.5–85.6 Overlap 0.42 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.8–82.7 ATL 82.6–85.4 Overlap 0.07 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.9–82.6 ATL 82.8–85.3 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.0) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Kevin (#4)
t-statistic: -18.82
p-value: 3.48e-43

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Dr. Lila Shah

WAS 78.4–83.0 ATL 81.8–86.0 Overlap 1.23 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 80.7) — by 3.2 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 78.8–82.7 ATL 82.1–85.7 Overlap 0.52 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 80.7) — by 3.2 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.0–82.4 ATL 82.4–85.4 Overlap 0.06 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 80.7) — by 3.2 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.2–82.2 ATL 82.5–85.3 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 80.7) — by 3.2 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

WAS 79.4–82.1 ATL 82.7–85.1 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 80.7) — by 3.2 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic: -21.23
p-value: 2.93e-49

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Ice

WAS 79.2–83.1 ATL 81.8–86.1 Overlap 1.33 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.5–82.8 ATL 82.1–85.7 Overlap 0.67 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.7–82.6 ATL 82.4–85.5 Overlap 0.24 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.9–82.5 ATL 82.5–85.3 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

WAS 80.0–82.3 ATL 82.7–85.2 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Ice (#6)
t-statistic: -19.88
p-value: 7.42e-46

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Jamal Tol Warning

WAS 78.6–83.0 ATL 81.2–86.4 Overlap 1.72 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.4–82.7 ATL 81.7–86.0 Overlap 1.03 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.7–82.5 ATL 81.9–85.7 Overlap 0.62 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.9–82.4 ATL 82.1–85.5 Overlap 0.25 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 80.1–82.3 ATL 82.3–85.3 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Jamal (#7)
t-statistic: -15.39
p-value: 6.56e-34

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Jordan

WAS 79.0–83.2 ATL 81.8–85.8 Overlap 1.45 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.3–82.9 ATL 82.1–85.4 Overlap 0.79 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.5–82.6 ATL 82.3–85.2 Overlap 0.35 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.7–82.5 ATL 82.5–85.1 Overlap 0.02 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.9–82.3 ATL 82.6–84.9 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Jordan (#8)
t-statistic: -19.11
p-value: 5.92e-44

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Darren "Dimes" Lin

WAS 79.3–83.6 ATL 82.0–86.4 Overlap 1.61 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.2) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.5) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.7–83.2 ATL 82.3–86.0 Overlap 0.91 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.2) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.5) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.9–83.0 ATL 82.5–85.8 Overlap 0.46 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.2) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.5) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 80.1–82.8 ATL 82.7–85.6 Overlap 0.11 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.2) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.5) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 80.2–82.7 ATL 82.9–85.5 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 84.2) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.5) — by 2.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic: -18.51
p-value: 2.26e-42

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Maya Jefferson

WAS 78.7–83.7 ATL 81.9–85.9 Overlap 1.83 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.1–83.3 ATL 82.2–85.6 Overlap 1.1 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.4–83.0 ATL 82.4–85.4 Overlap 0.63 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.6–82.8 ATL 82.6–85.2 Overlap 0.26 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.7–82.7 ATL 82.7–85.1 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.2) — by 2.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic: -17.47
p-value: 6.20e-39

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Lexi

WAS 79.1–83.2 ATL 81.6–86.1 Overlap 1.58 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 79.4–82.9 ATL 82.0–85.7 Overlap 0.89 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.6–82.6 ATL 82.2–85.5 Overlap 0.44 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.8–82.5 ATL 82.4–85.3 Overlap 0.09 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

WAS 79.9–82.3 ATL 82.5–85.2 No overlap Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 81.1) — by 2.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math

Model: Lexi (#11)
t-statistic: -18.65
p-value: 1.15e-42

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Coach Sarah Watanabe

WAS 80.2–85.6 ATL 81.7–86.2 Overlap 3.94 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

WAS 80.6–85.2 ATL 82.0–85.8 Overlap 3.14 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

WAS 80.9–84.9 ATL 82.3–85.6 Overlap 2.62 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 81.1–84.7 ATL 82.4–85.4 Overlap 2.22 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

WAS 81.3–84.5 ATL 82.6–85.3 Overlap 1.89 pts Actual: WAS 77, ATL 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Atlanta Dream (avg. 83.9) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math

Model: Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic: -6.06
p-value: 8.88e-09

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	79.1–83.6	81.9–86.2	1.67 pts	—	No
90%	79.5–83.2	82.2–85.8	0.97 pts	—	No
85%	79.7–83.0	82.5–85.6	0.52 pts	—	No
80%	79.9–82.8	82.6–85.4	0.17 pts	—	No
75%	80.1–82.7	82.8–85.3	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	78.5–83.7	81.5–86.4	2.21 pts	—	No
90%	78.9–83.3	81.9–86.0	1.4 pts	—	No
85%	79.2–83.0	82.1–85.7	0.87 pts	—	No
80%	79.4–82.8	82.3–85.5	0.47 pts	—	No
75%	79.6–82.6	82.5–85.4	0.13 pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	79.2–83.3	81.6–86.3	1.78 pts	—	No
90%	79.5–83.0	81.9–85.9	1.06 pts	—	No
85%	79.7–82.8	82.2–85.7	0.59 pts	—	No
80%	79.9–82.6	82.4–85.5	0.24 pts	—	No
75%	80.0–82.5	82.5–85.3	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	79.0–83.5	81.9–86.2	1.58 pts	—	No
90%	79.4–83.1	82.2–85.8	0.88 pts	—	No
85%	79.6–82.9	82.5–85.6	0.42 pts	—	No
80%	79.8–82.7	82.6–85.4	0.07 pts	—	No
75%	79.9–82.6	82.8–85.3	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	78.4–83.0	81.8–86.0	1.23 pts	—	No
90%	78.8–82.7	82.1–85.7	0.52 pts	—	No
85%	79.0–82.4	82.4–85.4	0.06 pts	—	No
80%	79.2–82.2	82.5–85.3	— pts	—	No
75%	79.4–82.1	82.7–85.1	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	79.2–83.1	81.8–86.1	1.33 pts	—	No
90%	79.5–82.8	82.1–85.7	0.67 pts	—	No
85%	79.7–82.6	82.4–85.5	0.24 pts	—	No
80%	79.9–82.5	82.5–85.3	— pts	—	No
75%	80.0–82.3	82.7–85.2	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	78.6–83.0	81.2–86.4	1.72 pts	Yes	No
90%	79.4–82.7	81.7–86.0	1.03 pts	Yes	No
85%	79.7–82.5	81.9–85.7	0.62 pts	Yes	No
80%	79.9–82.4	82.1–85.5	0.25 pts	Yes	No
75%	80.1–82.3	82.3–85.3	— pts	Yes	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	79.0–83.2	81.8–85.8	1.45 pts	—	No
90%	79.3–82.9	82.1–85.4	0.79 pts	—	No
85%	79.5–82.6	82.3–85.2	0.35 pts	—	No
80%	79.7–82.5	82.5–85.1	0.02 pts	—	No
75%	79.9–82.3	82.6–84.9	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	79.3–83.6	82.0–86.4	1.61 pts	—	No
90%	79.7–83.2	82.3–86.0	0.91 pts	—	No
85%	79.9–83.0	82.5–85.8	0.46 pts	—	No
80%	80.1–82.8	82.7–85.6	0.11 pts	—	No
75%	80.2–82.7	82.9–85.5	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	78.7–83.7	81.9–85.9	1.83 pts	—	No
90%	79.1–83.3	82.2–85.6	1.1 pts	—	No
85%	79.4–83.0	82.4–85.4	0.63 pts	—	No
80%	79.6–82.8	82.6–85.2	0.26 pts	—	No
75%	79.7–82.7	82.7–85.1	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	79.1–83.2	81.6–86.1	1.58 pts	—	No
90%	79.4–82.9	82.0–85.7	0.89 pts	—	No
85%	79.6–82.6	82.2–85.5	0.44 pts	—	No
80%	79.8–82.5	82.4–85.3	0.09 pts	—	No
75%	79.9–82.3	82.5–85.2	— pts	—	No

Level	WAS range	ATL range	Overlap	Tol Warning	Actual landed in range?
95%	80.2–85.6	81.7–86.2	3.94 pts	—	No
90%	80.6–85.2	82.0–85.8	3.14 pts	—	No
85%	80.9–84.9	82.3–85.6	2.62 pts	—	No
80%	81.1–84.7	82.4–85.4	2.22 pts	—	No
75%	81.3–84.5	82.6–85.3	1.89 pts	—	No

Washington Mystics at Atlanta Dream