Clay's Almanac
WNBA · August 8, 2026
Almanac — change team skin

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

Almanac
NBA
WNBA
Log in Join

← Back to WNBA

Las Vegas Aces at Minnesota Lynx

LVA 87 – MIN 98

August 8, 2026 · Final

Coach Sarah Watanabe

Best model for this game

Coach Sarah Watanabe
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 LVA at MIN

All 12 models’ predicted scores

LVA — one dot per model MIN — one dot per model Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Vince Chambers Tol Warning
LVA 87.5–92.0 MIN 86.9–93.5 Overlap 4.52 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.9–91.7 MIN 87.4–93.0 Overlap 3.87 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.0–91.6 MIN 87.8–92.7 Overlap 3.64 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.2–91.5 MIN 88.0–92.4 Overlap 3.28 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.5–91.3 MIN 88.3–92.2 Overlap 2.86 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
-1.59
p-value
1.13e-01

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 Tol Warning
LVA 86.5–93.8 MIN 87.6–93.5 Overlap 5.88 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.3) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.1) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.1–93.2 MIN 87.9–93.3 Overlap 5.31 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.3) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.1) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.4–92.8 MIN 88.4–92.9 Overlap 4.42 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.3) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.1) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.7–92.5 MIN 88.7–92.4 Overlap 3.65 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.3) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.1) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.0–92.3 MIN 88.8–92.0 Overlap 3.18 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.3) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.1) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
-0.65
p-value
5.14e-01

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

Dr. Wallace
LVA 86.6–93.4 MIN 86.8–93.8 Overlap 6.59 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.1–92.9 MIN 87.3–93.2 Overlap 5.51 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.5–92.5 MIN 87.7–92.8 Overlap 4.79 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.7–92.2 MIN 88.0–92.5 Overlap 4.25 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.0–92.0 MIN 88.2–92.3 Overlap 3.79 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
-1.09
p-value
2.76e-01

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
LVA 87.7–93.2 MIN 87.9–93.6 Overlap 5.25 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.7–93.0 MIN 88.1–92.9 Overlap 4.79 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.8–92.4 MIN 88.3–92.6 Overlap 4.06 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.9–91.9 MIN 88.4–92.2 Overlap 3.57 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.1–91.5 MIN 88.5–91.7 Overlap 3.02 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
-1.28
p-value
2.04e-01

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
LVA 85.3–93.4 MIN 86.3–92.7 Overlap 6.34 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 86.0–92.7 MIN 86.5–92.3 Overlap 5.78 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 86.4–92.3 MIN 86.6–92.0 Overlap 5.39 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 86.7–92.0 MIN 86.8–91.6 Overlap 4.84 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.0–91.7 MIN 87.0–91.0 Overlap 4.0 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.4) over Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
1.44
p-value
1.51e-01

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

Ice
LVA 86.5–92.5 MIN 86.3–93.3 Overlap 5.97 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.8) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.0–92.0 MIN 86.9–92.8 Overlap 5.01 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.8) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.3–91.7 MIN 87.2–92.4 Overlap 4.38 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.8) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.6–91.5 MIN 87.5–92.1 Overlap 3.9 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.8) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.8–91.3 MIN 87.7–91.9 Overlap 3.5 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.8) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
-1.36
p-value
1.74e-01

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
LVA 87.4–92.0 MIN 85.9–93.6 Overlap 4.61 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.7) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.5–91.9 MIN 86.5–93.0 Overlap 4.42 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.7) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.7–91.7 MIN 86.9–92.6 Overlap 4.0 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.7) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.9–91.4 MIN 87.2–92.3 Overlap 3.55 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.7) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.1–91.3 MIN 87.5–92.0 Overlap 3.19 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.7) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
-0.23
p-value
8.15e-01

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
LVA 86.8–93.1 MIN 86.4–94.2 Overlap 6.33 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.3–92.6 MIN 87.0–93.6 Overlap 5.31 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.6–92.2 MIN 87.4–93.1 Overlap 4.65 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.8–92.0 MIN 87.7–92.8 Overlap 4.14 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.1–91.8 MIN 87.9–92.5 Overlap 3.72 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.2) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.9) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
-1.29
p-value
2.00e-01

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
LVA 85.7–93.8 MIN 86.1–94.0 Overlap 7.71 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 86.3–93.2 MIN 86.8–93.4 Overlap 6.42 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 86.8–92.8 MIN 87.2–93.0 Overlap 5.58 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.1–92.4 MIN 87.5–92.7 Overlap 4.93 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.4–92.2 MIN 87.8–92.4 Overlap 4.39 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
-1.22
p-value
2.24e-01

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

Maya Jefferson
LVA 85.9–94.0 MIN 85.8–94.4 Overlap 8.08 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 86.6–93.4 MIN 86.5–93.7 Overlap 6.78 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.0–92.9 MIN 86.9–93.2 Overlap 5.94 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.3–92.6 MIN 87.3–92.9 Overlap 5.29 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.6–92.3 MIN 87.6–92.6 Overlap 4.74 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.1) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 90.0) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
-0.42
p-value
6.75e-01

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

Lexi
LVA 86.2–92.8 MIN 86.0–93.5 Overlap 6.65 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 86.7–92.3 MIN 86.6–92.9 Overlap 5.58 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.1–91.9 MIN 87.0–92.5 Overlap 4.89 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.3–91.7 MIN 87.3–92.2 Overlap 4.35 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.5–91.4 MIN 87.5–91.9 Overlap 3.9 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 89.7) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.5) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
-1.02
p-value
3.11e-01

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

Coach Sarah Watanabe Tol Warning
LVA 87.5–93.1 MIN 88.2–94.1 Overlap 4.86 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.6) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.9–92.7 MIN 88.4–93.6 Overlap 4.33 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.6) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 87.9–92.2 MIN 88.6–93.2 Overlap 3.64 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.6) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.0–92.0 MIN 88.8–92.9 Overlap 3.21 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.6) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

LVA 88.1–91.9 MIN 88.9–92.7 Overlap 2.96 pts Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Minnesota Lynx (avg. 90.6) over Las Vegas Aces (avg. 89.8) — by under a point. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
-3.53
p-value
5.36e-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.

View as table
Vince Chambers — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 87.5–92.0 86.9–93.5 4.52 pts Yes No
90% 87.9–91.7 87.4–93.0 3.87 pts Yes No
85% 88.0–91.6 87.8–92.7 3.64 pts Yes No
80% 88.2–91.5 88.0–92.4 3.28 pts Yes No
75% 88.5–91.3 88.3–92.2 2.86 pts Yes No
Reg — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.5–93.8 87.6–93.5 5.88 pts Yes No
90% 87.1–93.2 87.9–93.3 5.31 pts Yes No
85% 87.4–92.8 88.4–92.9 4.42 pts Yes No
80% 87.7–92.5 88.7–92.4 3.65 pts Yes No
75% 88.0–92.3 88.8–92.0 3.18 pts Yes No
Dr. Wallace — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.6–93.4 86.8–93.8 6.59 pts — No
90% 87.1–92.9 87.3–93.2 5.51 pts — No
85% 87.5–92.5 87.7–92.8 4.79 pts — No
80% 87.7–92.2 88.0–92.5 4.25 pts — No
75% 88.0–92.0 88.2–92.3 3.79 pts — No
Kevin — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 87.7–93.2 87.9–93.6 5.25 pts Yes No
90% 87.7–93.0 88.1–92.9 4.79 pts Yes No
85% 87.8–92.4 88.3–92.6 4.06 pts Yes No
80% 87.9–91.9 88.4–92.2 3.57 pts Yes No
75% 88.1–91.5 88.5–91.7 3.02 pts Yes No
Dr. Lila Shah — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.3–93.4 86.3–92.7 6.34 pts Yes No
90% 86.0–92.7 86.5–92.3 5.78 pts Yes No
85% 86.4–92.3 86.6–92.0 5.39 pts Yes No
80% 86.7–92.0 86.8–91.6 4.84 pts Yes No
75% 87.0–91.7 87.0–91.0 4.0 pts Yes No
Ice — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.5–92.5 86.3–93.3 5.97 pts — No
90% 87.0–92.0 86.9–92.8 5.01 pts — No
85% 87.3–91.7 87.2–92.4 4.38 pts — No
80% 87.6–91.5 87.5–92.1 3.9 pts — No
75% 87.8–91.3 87.7–91.9 3.5 pts — No
Jamal — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 87.4–92.0 85.9–93.6 4.61 pts Yes No
90% 87.5–91.9 86.5–93.0 4.42 pts Yes No
85% 87.7–91.7 86.9–92.6 4.0 pts Yes No
80% 87.9–91.4 87.2–92.3 3.55 pts Yes No
75% 88.1–91.3 87.5–92.0 3.19 pts Yes No
Jordan — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.8–93.1 86.4–94.2 6.33 pts — No
90% 87.3–92.6 87.0–93.6 5.31 pts — No
85% 87.6–92.2 87.4–93.1 4.65 pts — No
80% 87.8–92.0 87.7–92.8 4.14 pts — No
75% 88.1–91.8 87.9–92.5 3.72 pts — No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.7–93.8 86.1–94.0 7.71 pts — No
90% 86.3–93.2 86.8–93.4 6.42 pts — No
85% 86.8–92.8 87.2–93.0 5.58 pts — No
80% 87.1–92.4 87.5–92.7 4.93 pts — No
75% 87.4–92.2 87.8–92.4 4.39 pts — No
Maya Jefferson — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 85.9–94.0 85.8–94.4 8.08 pts — No
90% 86.6–93.4 86.5–93.7 6.78 pts — No
85% 87.0–92.9 86.9–93.2 5.94 pts — No
80% 87.3–92.6 87.3–92.9 5.29 pts — No
75% 87.6–92.3 87.6–92.6 4.74 pts — No
Lexi — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 86.2–92.8 86.0–93.5 6.65 pts — No
90% 86.7–92.3 86.6–92.9 5.58 pts — No
85% 87.1–91.9 87.0–92.5 4.89 pts — No
80% 87.3–91.7 87.3–92.2 4.35 pts — No
75% 87.5–91.4 87.5–91.9 3.9 pts — No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — LVA at MIN — Actual: LVA 87, MIN 98
Level LVA range MIN range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 87.5–93.1 88.2–94.1 4.86 pts Yes No
90% 87.9–92.7 88.4–93.6 4.33 pts Yes No
85% 87.9–92.2 88.6–93.2 3.64 pts Yes No
80% 88.0–92.0 88.8–92.9 3.21 pts Yes No
75% 88.1–91.9 88.9–92.7 2.96 pts Yes No