Clay's Almanac
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

Chicago Sky at Los Angeles Sparks

CHI 87 – LAS 102

July 10, 2026 · Final

Dr. Lila Shah

Best model for this game

Dr. Lila Shah
All models: 11-1
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 CHI at LAS

All 12 models’ predicted scores

CHI — one dot per model LAS — one dot per model Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Vince Chambers
CHI 83.0–87.8 LAS 83.9–88.1 Overlap 3.93 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.4–87.4 LAS 84.2–87.7 Overlap 3.21 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.7–87.2 LAS 84.4–87.5 Overlap 2.74 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.9–87.0 LAS 84.6–87.3 Overlap 2.38 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.0–86.8 LAS 84.7–87.2 Overlap 2.08 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
-3.88
p-value
1.43e-04

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
CHI 84.0–87.3 LAS 84.0–88.5 Overlap 3.34 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.0–87.1 LAS 84.3–88.1 Overlap 2.8 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–87.1 LAS 84.6–87.9 Overlap 2.51 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.3–87.0 LAS 84.8–87.7 Overlap 2.2 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.3–86.8 LAS 84.9–87.6 Overlap 1.91 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
-4.91
p-value
1.93e-06

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
CHI 83.8–88.3 LAS 84.0–88.1 Overlap 4.16 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.0–87.4 LAS 84.3–87.8 Overlap 3.08 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.1–87.0 LAS 84.5–87.6 Overlap 2.44 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–86.9 LAS 84.7–87.4 Overlap 2.21 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–86.7 LAS 84.8–87.3 Overlap 1.83 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
-4.34
p-value
2.28e-05

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
CHI 83.6–87.2 LAS 84.2–88.0 Overlap 3.07 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.9–86.9 LAS 84.5–87.7 Overlap 2.46 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.1–86.7 LAS 84.7–87.5 Overlap 2.07 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–86.6 LAS 84.8–87.3 Overlap 1.77 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.3–86.5 LAS 85.0–87.2 Overlap 1.52 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
-5.70
p-value
4.49e-08

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
CHI 82.7–86.2 LAS 83.6–87.4 Overlap 2.61 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Chicago Sky (avg. 84.5) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.0–85.9 LAS 83.9–87.1 Overlap 2.02 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Chicago Sky (avg. 84.5) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.2–85.7 LAS 84.1–86.9 Overlap 1.64 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Chicago Sky (avg. 84.5) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.3–85.6 LAS 84.3–86.8 Overlap 1.34 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Chicago Sky (avg. 84.5) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.4–85.5 LAS 84.4–86.6 Overlap 1.1 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Chicago Sky (avg. 84.5) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
-8.99
p-value
2.31e-16

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
CHI 83.3–87.2 LAS 84.0–87.8 Overlap 3.21 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.9) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.6–86.9 LAS 84.3–87.5 Overlap 2.59 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.9) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.8–86.7 LAS 84.5–87.3 Overlap 2.19 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.9) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.0–86.5 LAS 84.7–87.1 Overlap 1.88 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.9) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.1–86.4 LAS 84.8–87.0 Overlap 1.62 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.9) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
-5.16
p-value
6.17e-07

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
CHI 84.0–86.9 LAS 84.2–87.8 Overlap 2.68 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–86.7 LAS 84.5–87.5 Overlap 2.14 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.3–86.5 LAS 84.7–87.3 Overlap 1.82 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.4–86.4 LAS 84.8–87.2 Overlap 1.55 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.5–86.3 LAS 85.0–87.1 Overlap 1.3 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.0) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
-5.08
p-value
8.90e-07

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
CHI 83.5–87.2 LAS 84.3–88.1 Overlap 2.81 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.8–86.9 LAS 84.6–87.8 Overlap 2.22 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.0–86.7 LAS 84.8–87.6 Overlap 1.83 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–86.5 LAS 85.0–87.4 Overlap 1.54 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.3–86.4 LAS 85.1–87.3 Overlap 1.29 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
-7.40
p-value
4.03e-12

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
CHI 83.4–87.5 LAS 84.2–88.1 Overlap 3.33 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.7–87.2 LAS 84.5–87.8 Overlap 2.69 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.9–86.9 LAS 84.7–87.6 Overlap 2.27 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.1–86.8 LAS 84.8–87.4 Overlap 1.95 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–86.6 LAS 85.0–87.3 Overlap 1.68 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
-5.31
p-value
2.92e-07

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
CHI 83.3–87.4 LAS 84.2–88.0 Overlap 3.19 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.6–87.0 LAS 84.5–87.7 Overlap 2.55 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.8–86.8 LAS 84.7–87.5 Overlap 2.13 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.0–86.7 LAS 84.8–87.4 Overlap 1.81 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.1–86.5 LAS 85.0–87.2 Overlap 1.55 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.3) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
-6.20
p-value
3.42e-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.

Lexi
CHI 83.9–87.0 LAS 84.0–87.6 Overlap 3.0 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.2) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.0–86.3 LAS 84.3–87.3 Overlap 2.05 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.2) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.1–86.2 LAS 84.5–87.2 Overlap 1.78 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.2) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–86.1 LAS 84.6–87.0 Overlap 1.49 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.2) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–86.0 LAS 84.7–86.9 Overlap 1.25 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 85.2) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
-5.52
p-value
1.08e-07

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
CHI 84.0–88.6 LAS 82.7–88.3 Overlap 4.3 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Chicago Sky (avg. 86.3) over Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.3–88.2 LAS 83.2–87.8 Overlap 3.48 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Chicago Sky (avg. 86.3) over Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.6–88.0 LAS 83.5–87.5 Overlap 2.95 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Chicago Sky (avg. 86.3) over Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.8–87.8 LAS 83.7–87.3 Overlap 2.54 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Chicago Sky (avg. 86.3) over Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.9–87.6 LAS 83.9–87.1 Overlap 2.2 pts Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Chicago Sky (avg. 86.3) over Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
4.76
p-value
3.94e-06

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 — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.0–87.8 83.9–88.1 3.93 pts No
90% 83.4–87.4 84.2–87.7 3.21 pts No
85% 83.7–87.2 84.4–87.5 2.74 pts No
80% 83.9–87.0 84.6–87.3 2.38 pts No
75% 84.0–86.8 84.7–87.2 2.08 pts No
Reg — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 84.0–87.3 84.0–88.5 3.34 pts No
90% 84.0–87.1 84.3–88.1 2.8 pts No
85% 84.2–87.1 84.6–87.9 2.51 pts No
80% 84.3–87.0 84.8–87.7 2.2 pts No
75% 84.3–86.8 84.9–87.6 1.91 pts No
Dr. Wallace — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.8–88.3 84.0–88.1 4.16 pts No
90% 84.0–87.4 84.3–87.8 3.08 pts No
85% 84.1–87.0 84.5–87.6 2.44 pts No
80% 84.2–86.9 84.7–87.4 2.21 pts No
75% 84.2–86.7 84.8–87.3 1.83 pts No
Kevin — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.6–87.2 84.2–88.0 3.07 pts No
90% 83.9–86.9 84.5–87.7 2.46 pts No
85% 84.1–86.7 84.7–87.5 2.07 pts No
80% 84.2–86.6 84.8–87.3 1.77 pts No
75% 84.3–86.5 85.0–87.2 1.52 pts No
Dr. Lila Shah — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.7–86.2 83.6–87.4 2.61 pts No
90% 83.0–85.9 83.9–87.1 2.02 pts No
85% 83.2–85.7 84.1–86.9 1.64 pts No
80% 83.3–85.6 84.3–86.8 1.34 pts No
75% 83.4–85.5 84.4–86.6 1.1 pts No
Ice — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.3–87.2 84.0–87.8 3.21 pts No
90% 83.6–86.9 84.3–87.5 2.59 pts No
85% 83.8–86.7 84.5–87.3 2.19 pts No
80% 84.0–86.5 84.7–87.1 1.88 pts No
75% 84.1–86.4 84.8–87.0 1.62 pts No
Jamal — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 84.0–86.9 84.2–87.8 2.68 pts No
90% 84.2–86.7 84.5–87.5 2.14 pts No
85% 84.3–86.5 84.7–87.3 1.82 pts No
80% 84.4–86.4 84.8–87.2 1.55 pts No
75% 84.5–86.3 85.0–87.1 1.3 pts No
Jordan — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.5–87.2 84.3–88.1 2.81 pts No
90% 83.8–86.9 84.6–87.8 2.22 pts No
85% 84.0–86.7 84.8–87.6 1.83 pts No
80% 84.2–86.5 85.0–87.4 1.54 pts No
75% 84.3–86.4 85.1–87.3 1.29 pts No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.4–87.5 84.2–88.1 3.33 pts No
90% 83.7–87.2 84.5–87.8 2.69 pts No
85% 83.9–86.9 84.7–87.6 2.27 pts No
80% 84.1–86.8 84.8–87.4 1.95 pts No
75% 84.2–86.6 85.0–87.3 1.68 pts No
Maya Jefferson — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.3–87.4 84.2–88.0 3.19 pts No
90% 83.6–87.0 84.5–87.7 2.55 pts No
85% 83.8–86.8 84.7–87.5 2.13 pts No
80% 84.0–86.7 84.8–87.4 1.81 pts No
75% 84.1–86.5 85.0–87.2 1.55 pts No
Lexi — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.9–87.0 84.0–87.6 3.0 pts No
90% 84.0–86.3 84.3–87.3 2.05 pts No
85% 84.1–86.2 84.5–87.2 1.78 pts No
80% 84.2–86.1 84.6–87.0 1.49 pts No
75% 84.2–86.0 84.7–86.9 1.25 pts No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — CHI at LAS — Actual: CHI 87, LAS 102
Level CHI range LAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 84.0–88.6 82.7–88.3 4.3 pts No
90% 84.3–88.2 83.2–87.8 3.48 pts No
85% 84.6–88.0 83.5–87.5 2.95 pts No
80% 84.8–87.8 83.7–87.3 2.54 pts No
75% 84.9–87.6 83.9–87.1 2.2 pts No