Clay's Almanac
WNBA · June 24, 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

Phoenix Mercury at Indiana Fever

PHX 111 – IND 109

June 24, 2026 · Final

Dr. Lila Shah

Best model for this game

Dr. Lila Shah
All models: 0-12
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 PHX at IND

All 12 models’ predicted scores

PHX — one dot per model IND — one dot per model Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Vince Chambers
PHX 80.4–84.1 IND 85.5–89.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.4 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.7–83.8 IND 85.8–89.4 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.4 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.9–83.6 IND 86.0–89.2 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.4 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.1–83.4 IND 86.2–89.0 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.4 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.2–83.3 IND 86.3–88.9 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.4 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
-38.54
p-value
1.83e-80

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
PHX 79.8–84.2 IND 84.2–90.0 Overlap 0.05 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.0) — by 5.1 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 80.2–83.9 IND 84.6–89.5 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.0) — by 5.1 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.4–83.6 IND 84.9–89.2 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.0) — by 5.1 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.6–83.4 IND 85.2–89.0 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.0) — by 5.1 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.7–83.3 IND 85.4–88.8 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.0) — by 5.1 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
-28.05
p-value
2.78e-60

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
PHX 80.2–84.2 IND 84.7–89.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.0 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.5–83.9 IND 85.1–89.3 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.0 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.7–83.7 IND 85.3–89.0 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.0 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.9–83.5 IND 85.5–88.8 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.0 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.0–83.4 IND 85.7–88.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.2) — by 5.0 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
-31.44
p-value
2.53e-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.

Kevin Tol Warning
PHX 80.4–84.7 IND 85.1–89.2 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.9 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.7–83.9 IND 85.5–88.9 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.9 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.9–83.5 IND 85.7–88.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.9 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.0–83.3 IND 85.8–88.5 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.9 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.1–83.3 IND 86.0–88.4 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.2) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.9 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
-31.73
p-value
3.36e-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 Tol Warning
PHX 80.9–85.2 IND 84.5–88.2 Overlap 0.71 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 3.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 81.2–84.8 IND 84.8–88.1 Overlap 0.08 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 3.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 81.4–84.6 IND 84.9–87.9 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 3.6 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.6–84.4 IND 85.1–87.8 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 3.6 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.8–84.3 IND 85.3–87.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.6) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.0) — by 3.6 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
-21.10
p-value
9.32e-47

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 Tol Warning
PHX 80.8–85.3 IND 84.3–89.4 Overlap 0.98 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.9) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 81.0–84.6 IND 84.7–89.0 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.9) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.1–83.8 IND 85.0–88.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.9) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.2–83.5 IND 85.2–88.5 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.9) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.3–83.3 IND 85.3–88.4 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.9) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
-26.33
p-value
3.67e-59

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
PHX 80.4–85.1 IND 84.7–89.4 Overlap 0.37 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.4) — by 4.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 81.0–84.9 IND 85.1–89.0 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.4) — by 4.6 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.0–84.1 IND 85.3–88.8 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.4) — by 4.6 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.3–83.9 IND 85.5–88.6 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.4) — by 4.6 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.5–83.6 IND 85.7–88.4 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.1) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.4) — by 4.6 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
-27.22
p-value
5.91e-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.

Jordan Tol Warning
PHX 81.0–85.6 IND 84.3–89.4 Overlap 1.34 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.5) — by 4.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 81.2–85.1 IND 84.7–89.0 Overlap 0.44 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.5) — by 4.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 81.3–84.4 IND 85.0–88.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.5) — by 4.3 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.4–84.0 IND 85.2–88.5 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.5) — by 4.3 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.4–83.7 IND 85.3–88.3 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.5) — by 4.3 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
-23.65
p-value
2.28e-53

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
PHX 80.3–85.4 IND 84.0–89.6 Overlap 1.4 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 80.5–84.4 IND 84.5–89.1 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.9–84.1 IND 84.8–88.8 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.0–83.9 IND 85.0–88.6 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.1–83.5 IND 85.2–88.4 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.8) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
-23.31
p-value
1.13e-52

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 Tol Warning
PHX 81.0–85.1 IND 84.5–89.0 Overlap 0.64 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.4 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 81.3–84.1 IND 84.8–88.6 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.4 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.3–83.6 IND 85.1–88.4 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.4 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.4–83.1 IND 85.3–88.2 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.4 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.4–83.1 IND 85.4–88.1 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.4 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
-28.13
p-value
5.44e-63

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
PHX 80.3–84.4 IND 84.6–89.3 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.0) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 95% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.6–84.0 IND 85.0–89.0 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.0) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.8–83.8 IND 85.2–88.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.0) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.0–83.7 IND 85.4–88.5 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.0) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 81.1–83.5 IND 85.6–88.4 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 87.0) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 82.3) — by 4.6 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
-29.82
p-value
1.38e-65

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
PHX 80.1–86.4 IND 85.0–89.2 Overlap 1.38 pts Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 81.9) — by 4.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 80.3–84.8 IND 85.2–88.8 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 81.9) — by 4.8 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.6–83.4 IND 85.3–88.7 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 81.9) — by 4.8 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.7–82.9 IND 85.3–88.1 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 81.9) — by 4.8 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 80.7–82.7 IND 85.5–87.9 No overlap Actual: PHX 111, IND 109

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 86.7) over Phoenix Mercury (avg. 81.9) — by 4.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
-23.01
p-value
1.32e-51

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 — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.4–84.1 85.5–89.7 — pts — No
90% 80.7–83.8 85.8–89.4 — pts — No
85% 80.9–83.6 86.0–89.2 — pts — No
80% 81.1–83.4 86.2–89.0 — pts — No
75% 81.2–83.3 86.3–88.9 — pts — No
Reg — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 79.8–84.2 84.2–90.0 0.05 pts — No
90% 80.2–83.9 84.6–89.5 — pts — No
85% 80.4–83.6 84.9–89.2 — pts — No
80% 80.6–83.4 85.2–89.0 — pts — No
75% 80.7–83.3 85.4–88.8 — pts — No
Dr. Wallace — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.2–84.2 84.7–89.7 — pts — No
90% 80.5–83.9 85.1–89.3 — pts — No
85% 80.7–83.7 85.3–89.0 — pts — No
80% 80.9–83.5 85.5–88.8 — pts — No
75% 81.0–83.4 85.7–88.7 — pts — No
Kevin — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.4–84.7 85.1–89.2 — pts Yes No
90% 80.7–83.9 85.5–88.9 — pts Yes No
85% 80.9–83.5 85.7–88.7 — pts Yes No
80% 81.0–83.3 85.8–88.5 — pts Yes No
75% 81.1–83.3 86.0–88.4 — pts Yes No
Dr. Lila Shah — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.9–85.2 84.5–88.2 0.71 pts Yes No
90% 81.2–84.8 84.8–88.1 0.08 pts Yes No
85% 81.4–84.6 84.9–87.9 — pts Yes No
80% 81.6–84.4 85.1–87.8 — pts Yes No
75% 81.8–84.3 85.3–87.7 — pts Yes No
Ice — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.8–85.3 84.3–89.4 0.98 pts Yes No
90% 81.0–84.6 84.7–89.0 — pts Yes No
85% 81.1–83.8 85.0–88.7 — pts Yes No
80% 81.2–83.5 85.2–88.5 — pts Yes No
75% 81.3–83.3 85.3–88.4 — pts Yes No
Jamal — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.4–85.1 84.7–89.4 0.37 pts Yes No
90% 81.0–84.9 85.1–89.0 — pts Yes No
85% 81.0–84.1 85.3–88.8 — pts Yes No
80% 81.3–83.9 85.5–88.6 — pts Yes No
75% 81.5–83.6 85.7–88.4 — pts Yes No
Jordan — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 81.0–85.6 84.3–89.4 1.34 pts Yes No
90% 81.2–85.1 84.7–89.0 0.44 pts Yes No
85% 81.3–84.4 85.0–88.7 — pts Yes No
80% 81.4–84.0 85.2–88.5 — pts Yes No
75% 81.4–83.7 85.3–88.3 — pts Yes No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.3–85.4 84.0–89.6 1.4 pts Yes No
90% 80.5–84.4 84.5–89.1 — pts Yes No
85% 80.9–84.1 84.8–88.8 — pts Yes No
80% 81.0–83.9 85.0–88.6 — pts Yes No
75% 81.1–83.5 85.2–88.4 — pts Yes No
Maya Jefferson — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 81.0–85.1 84.5–89.0 0.64 pts Yes No
90% 81.3–84.1 84.8–88.6 — pts Yes No
85% 81.3–83.6 85.1–88.4 — pts Yes No
80% 81.4–83.1 85.3–88.2 — pts Yes No
75% 81.4–83.1 85.4–88.1 — pts Yes No
Lexi — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.3–84.4 84.6–89.3 — pts — No
90% 80.6–84.0 85.0–89.0 — pts — No
85% 80.8–83.8 85.2–88.7 — pts — No
80% 81.0–83.7 85.4–88.5 — pts — No
75% 81.1–83.5 85.6–88.4 — pts — No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — PHX at IND — Actual: PHX 111, IND 109
Level PHX range IND range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 80.1–86.4 85.0–89.2 1.38 pts Yes No
90% 80.3–84.8 85.2–88.8 — pts Yes No
85% 80.6–83.4 85.3–88.7 — pts Yes No
80% 80.7–82.9 85.3–88.1 — pts Yes No
75% 80.7–82.7 85.5–87.9 — pts Yes No