Clay's Almanac
WNBA · June 17, 2026
Almanac — change team skin

Repaints the site's chrome in a team's colours. Predictions, grades and the colours on each game card are unchanged.

Almanac
NBA
WNBA
Log in Join

← Back to WNBA

Las Vegas Aces at Phoenix Mercury

LVA 86 – PHX 76

June 17, 2026 · Final

Coach Sarah Watanabe

Best model for this game

Coach Sarah Watanabe
All models: 12-0
Prediction ranges

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

Confidence level for LVA at PHX

All 12 models’ predicted scores

LVA — one dot per model PHX — one dot per model Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Vince Chambers Tol Warning
LVA 87.1–91.0 PHX 81.1–85.7 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.3 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.2–90.5 PHX 81.5–85.3 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.3 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.3–90.4 PHX 81.7–85.0 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.3 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.3–90.4 PHX 81.9–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.3 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.4–90.2 PHX 82.0–84.7 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.3 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
31.45
p-value
1.09e-69

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
LVA 86.1–91.5 PHX 81.1–85.4 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.6 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.5–91.1 PHX 81.5–85.1 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.6 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.8–90.8 PHX 81.7–84.8 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.6 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.1–90.6 PHX 81.8–84.7 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.6 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.2–90.4 PHX 82.0–84.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.6 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
32.86
p-value
6.06e-71

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
LVA 86.0–91.3 PHX 81.3–85.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.2 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.4–90.8 PHX 81.7–85.1 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.2 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.7–90.6 PHX 81.9–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.2 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.9–90.4 PHX 82.0–84.8 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.2 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.1–90.2 PHX 82.2–84.6 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.4) — by 5.2 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
32.02
p-value
2.01e-69

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
LVA 86.2–90.9 PHX 81.2–85.8 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.0 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.6–90.6 PHX 81.6–85.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.0 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.8–90.3 PHX 81.8–85.2 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.0 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.0–90.1 PHX 82.0–85.0 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.0 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.2–90.0 PHX 82.2–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.0 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
30.93
p-value
2.25e-69

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
LVA 85.4–91.5 PHX 80.6–85.5 Overlap 0.08 pts Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 5.4 points. The ranges barely touch.

LVA 85.9–91.0 PHX 81.0–85.1 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 5.4 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.2–90.7 PHX 81.3–84.8 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 5.4 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.4–90.4 PHX 81.5–84.6 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 5.4 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.6–90.2 PHX 81.6–84.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 5.4 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
28.28
p-value
1.80e-62

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
LVA 85.7–91.3 PHX 81.3–85.3 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.5) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.2 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.2–90.8 PHX 81.6–85.0 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.5) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.2 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.4–90.5 PHX 81.8–84.8 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.5) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.2 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.7–90.3 PHX 82.0–84.6 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.5) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.2 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.9–90.1 PHX 82.1–84.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.5) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.2 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
31.07
p-value
3.94e-66

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
LVA 85.8–91.0 PHX 81.0–85.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.1 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.2–90.5 PHX 81.4–85.2 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.1 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.5–90.3 PHX 81.6–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.1 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.7–90.1 PHX 81.8–84.8 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.1 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.9–89.9 PHX 81.9–84.6 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.4) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.1 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
30.34
p-value
1.06e-67

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 Tol Warning
LVA 86.6–91.3 PHX 81.4–85.2 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.4 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.8–91.2 PHX 81.7–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.4 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.0–90.7 PHX 81.9–84.7 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.4 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.3–90.2 PHX 82.1–84.6 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.4 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.5–89.8 PHX 82.2–84.4 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.4 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
31.41
p-value
1.26e-64

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 Tol Warning
LVA 86.4–91.6 PHX 81.9–85.1 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.1 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.8–91.0 PHX 82.1–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.1 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.2–90.5 PHX 82.2–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.1 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.3–90.4 PHX 82.3–84.7 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.1 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.3–90.2 PHX 82.4–84.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.5) — by 5.1 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
27.96
p-value
2.30e-61

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
LVA 86.1–91.2 PHX 81.5–85.2 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.3 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.6–90.8 PHX 81.8–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.3 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.8–90.5 PHX 82.0–84.7 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.3 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.0–90.3 PHX 82.1–84.6 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.3 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.2–90.2 PHX 82.2–84.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.3) — by 5.3 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
34.52
p-value
1.53e-72

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
LVA 86.0–91.6 PHX 81.3–85.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.6) — by 5.2 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.4–91.1 PHX 81.6–85.5 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.6) — by 5.2 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.7–90.8 PHX 81.9–85.3 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.6) — by 5.2 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.9–90.6 PHX 82.1–85.1 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.6) — by 5.2 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 87.1–90.4 PHX 82.2–84.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.6) — by 5.2 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
29.00
p-value
3.10e-64

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 Tol Warning
LVA 85.5–91.0 PHX 80.5–83.9 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.3) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 6.0 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.0–90.6 PHX 81.1–83.4 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.3) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 6.0 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.2–90.3 PHX 81.2–83.4 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.3) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 6.0 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.5–90.1 PHX 81.4–83.3 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.3) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 6.0 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LVA 86.7–89.9 PHX 81.5–83.1 No overlap Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 88.3) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 6.0 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
36.75
p-value
7.33e-74

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.

View as table
Vince Chambers — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 87.1–91.0 81.1–85.7 — pts Yes No
90% 87.2–90.5 81.5–85.3 — pts Yes No
85% 87.3–90.4 81.7–85.0 — pts Yes No
80% 87.3–90.4 81.9–84.9 — pts Yes No
75% 87.4–90.2 82.0–84.7 — pts Yes No
Reg — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.1–91.5 81.1–85.4 — pts — No
90% 86.5–91.1 81.5–85.1 — pts — No
85% 86.8–90.8 81.7–84.8 — pts — No
80% 87.1–90.6 81.8–84.7 — pts — No
75% 87.2–90.4 82.0–84.5 — pts — No
Dr. Wallace — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.0–91.3 81.3–85.5 — pts — No
90% 86.4–90.8 81.7–85.1 — pts — No
85% 86.7–90.6 81.9–84.9 — pts — No
80% 86.9–90.4 82.0–84.8 — pts — No
75% 87.1–90.2 82.2–84.6 — pts — No
Kevin — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.2–90.9 81.2–85.8 — pts — No
90% 86.6–90.6 81.6–85.5 — pts — No
85% 86.8–90.3 81.8–85.2 — pts — No
80% 87.0–90.1 82.0–85.0 — pts — No
75% 87.2–90.0 82.2–84.9 — pts — No
Dr. Lila Shah — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.4–91.5 80.6–85.5 0.08 pts — No
90% 85.9–91.0 81.0–85.1 — pts — No
85% 86.2–90.7 81.3–84.8 — pts — No
80% 86.4–90.4 81.5–84.6 — pts — No
75% 86.6–90.2 81.6–84.5 — pts — No
Ice — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.7–91.3 81.3–85.3 — pts — No
90% 86.2–90.8 81.6–85.0 — pts — No
85% 86.4–90.5 81.8–84.8 — pts — No
80% 86.7–90.3 82.0–84.6 — pts — No
75% 86.9–90.1 82.1–84.5 — pts — No
Jamal — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.8–91.0 81.0–85.5 — pts — No
90% 86.2–90.5 81.4–85.2 — pts — No
85% 86.5–90.3 81.6–84.9 — pts — No
80% 86.7–90.1 81.8–84.8 — pts — No
75% 86.9–89.9 81.9–84.6 — pts — No
Jordan — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.6–91.3 81.4–85.2 — pts Yes No
90% 86.8–91.2 81.7–84.9 — pts Yes No
85% 87.0–90.7 81.9–84.7 — pts Yes No
80% 87.3–90.2 82.1–84.6 — pts Yes No
75% 87.5–89.8 82.2–84.4 — pts Yes No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.4–91.6 81.9–85.1 — pts Yes No
90% 86.8–91.0 82.1–84.9 — pts Yes No
85% 87.2–90.5 82.2–84.9 — pts Yes No
80% 87.3–90.4 82.3–84.7 — pts Yes No
75% 87.3–90.2 82.4–84.5 — pts Yes No
Maya Jefferson — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.1–91.2 81.5–85.2 — pts — No
90% 86.6–90.8 81.8–84.9 — pts — No
85% 86.8–90.5 82.0–84.7 — pts — No
80% 87.0–90.3 82.1–84.6 — pts — No
75% 87.2–90.2 82.2–84.5 — pts — No
Lexi — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.0–91.6 81.3–85.9 — pts — No
90% 86.4–91.1 81.6–85.5 — pts — No
85% 86.7–90.8 81.9–85.3 — pts — No
80% 86.9–90.6 82.1–85.1 — pts — No
75% 87.1–90.4 82.2–84.9 — pts — No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — LVA at PHX — Actual: LVA 86, PHX 76
Level LVA range PHX range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.5–91.0 80.5–83.9 — pts Yes No
90% 86.0–90.6 81.1–83.4 — pts Yes No
85% 86.2–90.3 81.2–83.4 — pts Yes No
80% 86.5–90.1 81.4–83.3 — pts Yes No
75% 86.7–89.9 81.5–83.1 — pts Yes No