Clay's Almanac
WNBA · August 5, 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

Dallas Wings at Washington Mystics

DAL 92 – WAS 96

August 5, 2026 · Final

Jamal

Best model for this game

Jamal
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 DAL at WAS

All 12 models’ predicted scores

DAL — one dot per model WAS — one dot per model Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Vince Chambers
DAL 83.9–91.1 WAS 79.5–85.3 Overlap 1.35 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.4) — by 5.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 84.5–90.5 WAS 79.9–84.8 Overlap 0.31 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.4) — by 5.1 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.9–90.1 WAS 80.2–84.5 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.4) — by 5.1 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

DAL 85.2–89.9 WAS 80.5–84.3 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.4) — by 5.1 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

DAL 85.4–89.6 WAS 80.7–84.1 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.4) — by 5.1 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
20.16
p-value
3.04e-39

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

Reg
DAL 83.5–91.0 WAS 79.4–85.6 Overlap 2.11 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 84.1–90.4 WAS 79.9–85.1 Overlap 1.0 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 84.5–90.0 WAS 80.2–84.8 Overlap 0.28 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.8–89.7 WAS 80.4–84.5 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.8 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

DAL 85.1–89.5 WAS 80.6–84.3 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 87.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
17.68
p-value
1.79e-34

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

Dr. Wallace
DAL 83.1–90.3 WAS 80.2–85.6 Overlap 2.54 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 3.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.6–89.7 WAS 80.7–85.2 Overlap 1.53 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 3.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 84.0–89.3 WAS 80.9–84.9 Overlap 0.86 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 3.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.3–89.0 WAS 81.1–84.7 Overlap 0.36 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 3.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.5–88.8 WAS 81.3–84.5 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 3.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
15.12
p-value
1.65e-28

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
DAL 84.2–90.2 WAS 79.9–86.0 Overlap 1.87 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 3.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 84.2–88.4 WAS 80.4–85.5 Overlap 1.35 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 3.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 84.4–88.1 WAS 80.7–85.2 Overlap 0.85 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 3.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.5–88.0 WAS 81.0–85.0 Overlap 0.5 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 3.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.6–87.9 WAS 81.2–84.8 Overlap 0.2 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.3) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 3.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
11.65
p-value
6.99e-21

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
DAL 82.8–88.6 WAS 80.4–85.4 Overlap 2.58 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.3–88.1 WAS 80.8–85.0 Overlap 1.71 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.6–87.8 WAS 81.0–84.7 Overlap 1.15 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.8–87.6 WAS 81.2–84.5 Overlap 0.71 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.0–87.4 WAS 81.4–84.3 Overlap 0.35 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.9) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
13.33
p-value
3.93e-25

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
DAL 82.3–88.7 WAS 80.5–85.4 Overlap 3.13 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

DAL 82.8–88.2 WAS 80.9–85.0 Overlap 2.23 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.1–87.8 WAS 81.2–84.8 Overlap 1.64 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.4–87.6 WAS 81.4–84.6 Overlap 1.19 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.6–87.4 WAS 81.6–84.4 Overlap 0.81 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.0) — by 2.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
11.25
p-value
5.10e-20

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
DAL 83.2–88.3 WAS 81.3–85.1 Overlap 1.91 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.5–88.2 WAS 81.6–84.8 Overlap 1.36 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.8–87.6 WAS 81.8–84.6 Overlap 0.85 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.1–87.2 WAS 82.0–84.5 Overlap 0.4 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.3–86.9 WAS 82.1–84.3 Overlap 0.09 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.5) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
11.34
p-value
1.60e-19

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
DAL 83.2–88.4 WAS 81.0–85.3 Overlap 2.08 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.6–88.0 WAS 81.3–84.9 Overlap 1.32 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.9–87.7 WAS 81.6–84.7 Overlap 0.82 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.1–87.5 WAS 81.7–84.5 Overlap 0.44 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.3–87.3 WAS 81.9–84.4 Overlap 0.13 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
14.27
p-value
4.02e-27

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
DAL 83.6–89.2 WAS 80.7–85.7 Overlap 2.07 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.7–89.1 WAS 81.1–85.3 Overlap 1.6 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.8–88.3 WAS 81.3–85.0 Overlap 1.19 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 84.1–88.2 WAS 81.5–84.8 Overlap 0.71 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.2–87.6 WAS 81.7–84.6 Overlap 0.39 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.8) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.2) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
11.00
p-value
3.17e-19

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
DAL 83.2–90.2 WAS 81.0–85.7 Overlap 2.5 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.3–88.5 WAS 81.3–85.3 Overlap 1.93 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.8–88.1 WAS 81.6–84.8 Overlap 0.96 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 83.8–87.7 WAS 81.9–84.5 Overlap 0.71 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.0–87.2 WAS 82.0–84.2 Overlap 0.16 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
8.96
p-value
1.65e-14

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
DAL 82.8–88.6 WAS 81.2–85.5 Overlap 2.65 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.4) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.3–88.1 WAS 81.6–85.1 Overlap 1.85 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.4) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.6–87.8 WAS 81.8–84.9 Overlap 1.33 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.4) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 83.8–87.6 WAS 82.0–84.7 Overlap 0.93 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.4) — by 2.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.0–87.4 WAS 82.1–84.6 Overlap 0.59 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 85.7) over Washington Mystics (avg. 83.4) — by 2.3 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
11.83
p-value
3.05e-21

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
DAL 83.5–89.6 WAS 80.3–84.8 Overlap 1.33 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.6) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

DAL 84.0–89.1 WAS 81.0–84.5 Overlap 0.56 pts Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.6) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.1 points. The ranges barely touch.

DAL 84.3–88.8 WAS 81.5–84.1 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.6) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.1 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

DAL 84.5–88.6 WAS 81.5–83.8 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.6) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.1 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

DAL 84.7–88.4 WAS 81.6–83.7 No overlap Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Dallas Wings (avg. 86.6) over Washington Mystics (avg. 82.5) — by 4.1 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
18.53
p-value
3.13e-36

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 — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.9–91.1 79.5–85.3 1.35 pts — No
90% 84.5–90.5 79.9–84.8 0.31 pts — No
85% 84.9–90.1 80.2–84.5 — pts — No
80% 85.2–89.9 80.5–84.3 — pts — No
75% 85.4–89.6 80.7–84.1 — pts — No
Reg — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.5–91.0 79.4–85.6 2.11 pts — No
90% 84.1–90.4 79.9–85.1 1.0 pts — No
85% 84.5–90.0 80.2–84.8 0.28 pts — No
80% 84.8–89.7 80.4–84.5 — pts — No
75% 85.1–89.5 80.6–84.3 — pts — No
Dr. Wallace — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.1–90.3 80.2–85.6 2.54 pts — No
90% 83.6–89.7 80.7–85.2 1.53 pts — No
85% 84.0–89.3 80.9–84.9 0.86 pts — No
80% 84.3–89.0 81.1–84.7 0.36 pts — No
75% 84.5–88.8 81.3–84.5 — pts — No
Kevin — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 84.2–90.2 79.9–86.0 1.87 pts Yes No
90% 84.2–88.4 80.4–85.5 1.35 pts Yes No
85% 84.4–88.1 80.7–85.2 0.85 pts Yes No
80% 84.5–88.0 81.0–85.0 0.5 pts Yes No
75% 84.6–87.9 81.2–84.8 0.2 pts Yes No
Dr. Lila Shah — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.8–88.6 80.4–85.4 2.58 pts — No
90% 83.3–88.1 80.8–85.0 1.71 pts — No
85% 83.6–87.8 81.0–84.7 1.15 pts — No
80% 83.8–87.6 81.2–84.5 0.71 pts — No
75% 84.0–87.4 81.4–84.3 0.35 pts — No
Ice — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.3–88.7 80.5–85.4 3.13 pts — No
90% 82.8–88.2 80.9–85.0 2.23 pts — No
85% 83.1–87.8 81.2–84.8 1.64 pts — No
80% 83.4–87.6 81.4–84.6 1.19 pts — No
75% 83.6–87.4 81.6–84.4 0.81 pts — No
Jamal — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.2–88.3 81.3–85.1 1.91 pts Yes No
90% 83.5–88.2 81.6–84.8 1.36 pts Yes No
85% 83.8–87.6 81.8–84.6 0.85 pts Yes No
80% 84.1–87.2 82.0–84.5 0.4 pts Yes No
75% 84.3–86.9 82.1–84.3 0.09 pts Yes No
Jordan — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.2–88.4 81.0–85.3 2.08 pts — No
90% 83.6–88.0 81.3–84.9 1.32 pts — No
85% 83.9–87.7 81.6–84.7 0.82 pts — No
80% 84.1–87.5 81.7–84.5 0.44 pts — No
75% 84.3–87.3 81.9–84.4 0.13 pts — No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.6–89.2 80.7–85.7 2.07 pts Yes No
90% 83.7–89.1 81.1–85.3 1.6 pts Yes No
85% 83.8–88.3 81.3–85.0 1.19 pts Yes No
80% 84.1–88.2 81.5–84.8 0.71 pts Yes No
75% 84.2–87.6 81.7–84.6 0.39 pts Yes No
Maya Jefferson — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.2–90.2 81.0–85.7 2.5 pts Yes No
90% 83.3–88.5 81.3–85.3 1.93 pts Yes No
85% 83.8–88.1 81.6–84.8 0.96 pts Yes No
80% 83.8–87.7 81.9–84.5 0.71 pts Yes No
75% 84.0–87.2 82.0–84.2 0.16 pts Yes No
Lexi — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.8–88.6 81.2–85.5 2.65 pts — No
90% 83.3–88.1 81.6–85.1 1.85 pts — No
85% 83.6–87.8 81.8–84.9 1.33 pts — No
80% 83.8–87.6 82.0–84.7 0.93 pts — No
75% 84.0–87.4 82.1–84.6 0.59 pts — No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — DAL at WAS — Actual: DAL 92, WAS 96
Level DAL range WAS range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.5–89.6 80.3–84.8 1.33 pts Yes No
90% 84.0–89.1 81.0–84.5 0.56 pts Yes No
85% 84.3–88.8 81.5–84.1 — pts Yes No
80% 84.5–88.6 81.5–83.8 — pts Yes No
75% 84.7–88.4 81.6–83.7 — pts Yes No