Clay's Almanac
WNBA · August 2, 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

Indiana Fever at Minnesota Lynx

IND 71 – MIN 79

August 2, 2026 · Final

Ice

Best model for this game

Ice
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 IND at MIN

All 12 models’ predicted scores

IND — one dot per model MIN — one dot per model Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Vince Chambers
IND 88.0–95.1 MIN 86.6–92.6 Overlap 4.59 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.6) — by 1.9 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 88.5–94.5 MIN 87.1–92.1 Overlap 3.54 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.6) — by 1.9 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 88.9–94.1 MIN 87.4–91.8 Overlap 2.86 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.6) — by 1.9 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

IND 89.2–93.9 MIN 87.7–91.5 Overlap 2.33 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.6) — by 1.9 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

IND 89.4–93.6 MIN 87.9–91.3 Overlap 1.9 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.6) — by 1.9 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
7.55
p-value
1.19e-11

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
IND 87.4–95.2 MIN 85.9–92.8 Overlap 5.34 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.3) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 88.1–94.5 MIN 86.4–92.2 Overlap 4.17 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.3) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 88.5–94.1 MIN 86.8–91.9 Overlap 3.4 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.3) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 88.8–93.8 MIN 87.1–91.6 Overlap 2.81 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.3) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

IND 89.0–93.6 MIN 87.3–91.4 Overlap 2.32 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 91.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.3) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
6.92
p-value
2.61e-10

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
IND 85.9–95.3 MIN 85.5–92.7 Overlap 6.75 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.7–94.6 MIN 86.1–92.1 Overlap 5.4 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.2–94.1 MIN 86.4–91.7 Overlap 4.52 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.5–93.7 MIN 86.7–91.4 Overlap 3.85 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.8–93.4 MIN 87.0–91.1 Overlap 3.29 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
4.84
p-value
4.27e-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.

Kevin Tol Warning
IND 85.6–95.0 MIN 86.1–92.6 Overlap 6.54 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.9) — by 1.4 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.3–94.3 MIN 86.6–91.1 Overlap 4.44 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.9) — by 1.4 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.8–93.8 MIN 86.9–90.6 Overlap 3.64 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.9) — by 1.4 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.2–93.4 MIN 87.2–90.5 Overlap 3.26 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.9) — by 1.4 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.5–93.1 MIN 87.3–90.5 Overlap 2.92 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 90.3) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.9) — by 1.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
4.14
p-value
6.58e-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.

Dr. Lila Shah Tol Warning
IND 85.1–92.6 MIN 85.8–90.6 Overlap 4.83 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 88.8) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 87.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 85.7–92.0 MIN 86.1–90.5 Overlap 4.38 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 88.8) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 87.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.1–91.6 MIN 86.4–90.4 Overlap 3.97 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 88.8) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 87.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.4–91.3 MIN 86.5–89.7 Overlap 3.2 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 88.8) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 87.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.6–91.0 MIN 86.7–89.4 Overlap 2.67 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 88.8) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 87.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
3.74
p-value
2.87e-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.

Ice
IND 85.4–93.5 MIN 85.7–91.2 Overlap 5.46 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.0–92.8 MIN 86.1–90.7 Overlap 4.58 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.4–92.4 MIN 86.4–90.4 Overlap 4.01 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.8–92.1 MIN 86.7–90.2 Overlap 3.47 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.0–91.8 MIN 86.8–90.0 Overlap 3.01 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
3.59
p-value
5.02e-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.

Jamal Tol Warning
IND 86.7–93.5 MIN 86.9–91.7 Overlap 4.79 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.6) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.1–92.4 MIN 87.0–91.2 Overlap 4.13 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.6) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.1–92.0 MIN 87.2–90.8 Overlap 3.61 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.6) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.2–91.3 MIN 87.3–90.3 Overlap 2.97 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.6) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

IND 87.4–91.0 MIN 87.4–90.0 Overlap 2.53 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.6) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
3.44
p-value
8.52e-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.

Jordan
IND 85.6–93.4 MIN 86.0–90.4 Overlap 4.4 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.2–92.7 MIN 86.3–90.0 Overlap 3.69 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.6–92.3 MIN 86.5–89.8 Overlap 3.15 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.9–92.0 MIN 86.7–89.6 Overlap 2.66 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

IND 87.2–91.8 MIN 86.9–89.4 Overlap 2.26 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.5) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
5.34
p-value
6.50e-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.

Darren "Dimes" Lin
IND 85.3–93.5 MIN 85.7–91.1 Overlap 5.44 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.0–92.9 MIN 86.1–90.7 Overlap 4.57 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.4–92.4 MIN 86.4–90.4 Overlap 3.99 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.8–92.1 MIN 86.6–90.2 Overlap 3.44 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.0–91.8 MIN 86.8–90.0 Overlap 2.98 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
3.76
p-value
2.82e-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.

Maya Jefferson Tol Warning
IND 85.6–92.9 MIN 86.6–90.7 Overlap 4.11 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.2) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.2–92.3 MIN 86.7–90.4 Overlap 3.68 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.2) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.5–92.0 MIN 86.9–89.9 Overlap 3.01 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.2) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.8–91.7 MIN 87.0–89.5 Overlap 2.5 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.2) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

IND 87.1–91.4 MIN 87.0–89.2 Overlap 2.09 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.2) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.2) — by 1.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
4.33
p-value
3.32e-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.

Lexi
IND 85.9–92.9 MIN 85.7–91.0 Overlap 5.16 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.4–92.4 MIN 86.2–90.6 Overlap 4.17 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.8–92.0 MIN 86.5–90.3 Overlap 3.53 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.1–91.7 MIN 86.7–90.1 Overlap 3.03 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.3–91.5 MIN 86.8–89.9 Overlap 2.62 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
4.13
p-value
7.05e-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.

Coach Sarah Watanabe
IND 86.2–93.1 MIN 84.9–91.9 Overlap 5.77 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.2 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 86.7–92.6 MIN 85.5–91.4 Overlap 4.65 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.2 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.1–92.2 MIN 85.8–91.0 Overlap 3.92 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.2 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.4–91.9 MIN 86.1–90.7 Overlap 3.35 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.2 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

IND 87.6–91.7 MIN 86.4–90.5 Overlap 2.88 pts Actual: IND 71, MIN 79

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Indiana Fever (avg. 89.6) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 88.4) — by 1.2 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
4.47
p-value
1.81e-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.

View as table
Vince Chambers — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 88.0–95.1 86.6–92.6 4.59 pts — No
90% 88.5–94.5 87.1–92.1 3.54 pts — No
85% 88.9–94.1 87.4–91.8 2.86 pts — No
80% 89.2–93.9 87.7–91.5 2.33 pts — No
75% 89.4–93.6 87.9–91.3 1.9 pts — No
Reg — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 87.4–95.2 85.9–92.8 5.34 pts — No
90% 88.1–94.5 86.4–92.2 4.17 pts — No
85% 88.5–94.1 86.8–91.9 3.4 pts — No
80% 88.8–93.8 87.1–91.6 2.81 pts — No
75% 89.0–93.6 87.3–91.4 2.32 pts — No
Dr. Wallace — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.9–95.3 85.5–92.7 6.75 pts — No
90% 86.7–94.6 86.1–92.1 5.4 pts — No
85% 87.2–94.1 86.4–91.7 4.52 pts — No
80% 87.5–93.7 86.7–91.4 3.85 pts — No
75% 87.8–93.4 87.0–91.1 3.29 pts — No
Kevin — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.6–95.0 86.1–92.6 6.54 pts Yes No
90% 86.3–94.3 86.6–91.1 4.44 pts Yes No
85% 86.8–93.8 86.9–90.6 3.64 pts Yes No
80% 87.2–93.4 87.2–90.5 3.26 pts Yes No
75% 87.5–93.1 87.3–90.5 2.92 pts Yes No
Dr. Lila Shah — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.1–92.6 85.8–90.6 4.83 pts Yes No
90% 85.7–92.0 86.1–90.5 4.38 pts Yes No
85% 86.1–91.6 86.4–90.4 3.97 pts Yes No
80% 86.4–91.3 86.5–89.7 3.2 pts Yes No
75% 86.6–91.0 86.7–89.4 2.67 pts Yes No
Ice — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.4–93.5 85.7–91.2 5.46 pts — No
90% 86.0–92.8 86.1–90.7 4.58 pts — No
85% 86.4–92.4 86.4–90.4 4.01 pts — No
80% 86.8–92.1 86.7–90.2 3.47 pts — No
75% 87.0–91.8 86.8–90.0 3.01 pts — No
Jamal — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.7–93.5 86.9–91.7 4.79 pts Yes No
90% 87.1–92.4 87.0–91.2 4.13 pts Yes No
85% 87.1–92.0 87.2–90.8 3.61 pts Yes No
80% 87.2–91.3 87.3–90.3 2.97 pts Yes No
75% 87.4–91.0 87.4–90.0 2.53 pts Yes No
Jordan — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.6–93.4 86.0–90.4 4.4 pts — No
90% 86.2–92.7 86.3–90.0 3.69 pts — No
85% 86.6–92.3 86.5–89.8 3.15 pts — No
80% 86.9–92.0 86.7–89.6 2.66 pts — No
75% 87.2–91.8 86.9–89.4 2.26 pts — No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.3–93.5 85.7–91.1 5.44 pts — No
90% 86.0–92.9 86.1–90.7 4.57 pts — No
85% 86.4–92.4 86.4–90.4 3.99 pts — No
80% 86.8–92.1 86.6–90.2 3.44 pts — No
75% 87.0–91.8 86.8–90.0 2.98 pts — No
Maya Jefferson — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.6–92.9 86.6–90.7 4.11 pts Yes No
90% 86.2–92.3 86.7–90.4 3.68 pts Yes No
85% 86.5–92.0 86.9–89.9 3.01 pts Yes No
80% 86.8–91.7 87.0–89.5 2.5 pts Yes No
75% 87.1–91.4 87.0–89.2 2.09 pts Yes No
Lexi — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.9–92.9 85.7–91.0 5.16 pts — No
90% 86.4–92.4 86.2–90.6 4.17 pts — No
85% 86.8–92.0 86.5–90.3 3.53 pts — No
80% 87.1–91.7 86.7–90.1 3.03 pts — No
75% 87.3–91.5 86.8–89.9 2.62 pts — No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — IND at MIN — Actual: IND 71, MIN 79
Level IND range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.2–93.1 84.9–91.9 5.77 pts — No
90% 86.7–92.6 85.5–91.4 4.65 pts — No
85% 87.1–92.2 85.8–91.0 3.92 pts — No
80% 87.4–91.9 86.1–90.7 3.35 pts — No
75% 87.6–91.7 86.4–90.5 2.88 pts — No