Clay's Almanac
WNBA · August 18, 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

Los Angeles Sparks at Connecticut Sun

LAS 77 – CON 85

August 18, 2026 · Final

Vince Chambers

Best model for this game

Vince Chambers
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 LAS at CON

All 12 models’ predicted scores

LAS — one dot per model CON — one dot per model Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Vince Chambers
LAS 83.7–89.8 CON 80.7–84.7 Overlap 0.93 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.6) — by 4.1 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 84.2–89.3 CON 81.1–84.5 Overlap 0.27 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.6) — by 4.1 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 84.5–89.0 CON 81.2–84.4 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.6) — by 4.1 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 84.8–88.7 CON 81.4–84.1 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.6) — by 4.1 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 85.0–88.5 CON 81.5–84.0 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.6) — by 4.1 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
27.85
p-value
1.66e-85

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
LAS 82.9–90.5 CON 78.7–84.9 Overlap 1.96 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 83.6–89.9 CON 79.2–84.6 Overlap 1.03 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 84.0–89.5 CON 79.7–84.4 Overlap 0.42 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 84.3–89.2 CON 79.9–84.2 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 84.5–89.0 CON 80.2–83.9 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.7) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 82.3) — by 4.5 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
23.17
p-value
2.32e-69

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

Dr. Wallace
LAS 82.8–89.5 CON 78.6–85.0 Overlap 2.16 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.8) — by 4.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 83.4–89.0 CON 79.1–84.5 Overlap 1.11 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.8) — by 4.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 83.7–88.6 CON 79.4–84.2 Overlap 0.43 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.8) — by 4.4 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 84.0–88.3 CON 79.7–83.9 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.8) — by 4.4 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 84.2–88.1 CON 79.9–83.7 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.8) — by 4.4 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
25.59
p-value
3.65e-78

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
LAS 83.2–89.2 CON 78.6–84.3 Overlap 1.08 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.6) — by 4.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 83.7–88.7 CON 79.0–83.8 Overlap 0.12 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.6) — by 4.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 84.0–88.4 CON 79.3–83.6 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.6) — by 4.6 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 84.3–88.2 CON 79.5–83.4 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.6) — by 4.6 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 84.5–88.0 CON 79.7–83.3 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.6) — by 4.6 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
27.96
p-value
4.28e-86

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
LAS 82.1–88.7 CON 77.6–83.8 Overlap 1.65 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.7) — by 4.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 82.7–88.1 CON 78.1–83.3 Overlap 0.63 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.7) — by 4.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.0–87.8 CON 78.5–83.0 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.7) — by 4.7 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.3–87.5 CON 78.7–82.7 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.7) — by 4.7 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.5–87.3 CON 78.9–82.5 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.7) — by 4.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
28.28
p-value
1.80e-87

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
LAS 82.0–87.6 CON 77.8–84.1 Overlap 2.11 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 82.5–87.3 CON 78.1–83.6 Overlap 1.04 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 83.0–87.1 CON 78.4–83.3 Overlap 0.23 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.3–86.9 CON 78.5–83.1 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.8 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.5–86.9 CON 78.7–82.8 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
26.14
p-value
2.78e-79

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
LAS 82.6–88.4 CON 78.5–84.1 Overlap 1.5 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 5.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 83.0–87.9 CON 78.6–83.4 Overlap 0.41 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 5.1 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.2–87.7 CON 78.8–83.0 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 5.1 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.3–87.2 CON 78.9–82.7 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 5.1 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.4–87.2 CON 79.0–82.2 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 5.1 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
29.22
p-value
9.47e-91

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
LAS 82.1–87.9 CON 78.3–83.3 Overlap 1.23 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 4.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 82.4–87.5 CON 78.4–83.1 Overlap 0.66 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 4.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.0–87.3 CON 78.5–82.9 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 4.8 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.1–87.0 CON 78.7–82.2 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 4.8 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.3–86.9 CON 78.8–82.1 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.2) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.4) — by 4.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
27.60
p-value
9.10e-85

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
LAS 81.9–89.0 CON 78.6–83.8 Overlap 1.98 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 82.4–88.5 CON 78.9–83.4 Overlap 0.95 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 82.8–88.1 CON 79.0–82.9 Overlap 0.05 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.1–87.8 CON 79.1–82.7 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.3–87.5 CON 79.1–82.5 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.4) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
28.09
p-value
4.59e-86

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
LAS 82.1–88.9 CON 78.2–83.6 Overlap 1.47 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 82.7–88.3 CON 78.4–83.4 Overlap 0.76 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.0–88.0 CON 78.6–83.3 Overlap 0.25 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.3–87.7 CON 78.7–83.0 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.5–87.5 CON 78.8–82.8 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.6) — by 4.9 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
27.85
p-value
4.08e-86

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
LAS 82.1–89.0 CON 78.3–83.8 Overlap 1.78 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.0) — by 4.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 82.6–88.5 CON 78.7–83.5 Overlap 0.84 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.0) — by 4.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.0–88.1 CON 78.9–83.3 Overlap 0.29 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.0) — by 4.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

LAS 83.3–87.8 CON 79.1–83.0 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.0) — by 4.6 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.5–87.6 CON 79.2–82.7 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 85.5) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 81.0) — by 4.6 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
25.15
p-value
1.17e-76

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
LAS 82.5–89.6 CON 78.3–84.0 Overlap 1.44 pts Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.8) — by 5.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

LAS 83.1–89.1 CON 78.6–83.1 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.8) — by 5.3 points. The 90% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.5–88.7 CON 78.8–82.8 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.8) — by 5.3 points. The 85% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 83.8–88.4 CON 79.0–82.6 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.8) — by 5.3 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

LAS 84.0–88.2 CON 79.2–82.5 No overlap Actual: LAS 77, CON 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Los Angeles Sparks (avg. 86.1) over Connecticut Sun (avg. 80.8) — by 5.3 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
28.39
p-value
5.71e-88

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 — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.7–89.8 80.7–84.7 0.93 pts — No
90% 84.2–89.3 81.1–84.5 0.27 pts — No
85% 84.5–89.0 81.2–84.4 — pts — No
80% 84.8–88.7 81.4–84.1 — pts — No
75% 85.0–88.5 81.5–84.0 — pts — No
Reg — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.9–90.5 78.7–84.9 1.96 pts — No
90% 83.6–89.9 79.2–84.6 1.03 pts — No
85% 84.0–89.5 79.7–84.4 0.42 pts — No
80% 84.3–89.2 79.9–84.2 — pts — No
75% 84.5–89.0 80.2–83.9 — pts — No
Dr. Wallace — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.8–89.5 78.6–85.0 2.16 pts — No
90% 83.4–89.0 79.1–84.5 1.11 pts — No
85% 83.7–88.6 79.4–84.2 0.43 pts — No
80% 84.0–88.3 79.7–83.9 — pts — No
75% 84.2–88.1 79.9–83.7 — pts — No
Kevin — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.2–89.2 78.6–84.3 1.08 pts — No
90% 83.7–88.7 79.0–83.8 0.12 pts — No
85% 84.0–88.4 79.3–83.6 — pts — No
80% 84.3–88.2 79.5–83.4 — pts — No
75% 84.5–88.0 79.7–83.3 — pts — No
Dr. Lila Shah — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.1–88.7 77.6–83.8 1.65 pts — No
90% 82.7–88.1 78.1–83.3 0.63 pts — No
85% 83.0–87.8 78.5–83.0 — pts — No
80% 83.3–87.5 78.7–82.7 — pts — No
75% 83.5–87.3 78.9–82.5 — pts — No
Ice — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.0–87.6 77.8–84.1 2.11 pts — No
90% 82.5–87.3 78.1–83.6 1.04 pts — No
85% 83.0–87.1 78.4–83.3 0.23 pts — No
80% 83.3–86.9 78.5–83.1 — pts — No
75% 83.5–86.9 78.7–82.8 — pts — No
Jamal — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.6–88.4 78.5–84.1 1.5 pts — No
90% 83.0–87.9 78.6–83.4 0.41 pts — No
85% 83.2–87.7 78.8–83.0 — pts — No
80% 83.3–87.2 78.9–82.7 — pts — No
75% 83.4–87.2 79.0–82.2 — pts — No
Jordan — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.1–87.9 78.3–83.3 1.23 pts — No
90% 82.4–87.5 78.4–83.1 0.66 pts — No
85% 83.0–87.3 78.5–82.9 — pts — No
80% 83.1–87.0 78.7–82.2 — pts — No
75% 83.3–86.9 78.8–82.1 — pts — No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 81.9–89.0 78.6–83.8 1.98 pts — No
90% 82.4–88.5 78.9–83.4 0.95 pts — No
85% 82.8–88.1 79.0–82.9 0.05 pts — No
80% 83.1–87.8 79.1–82.7 — pts — No
75% 83.3–87.5 79.1–82.5 — pts — No
Maya Jefferson — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.1–88.9 78.2–83.6 1.47 pts — No
90% 82.7–88.3 78.4–83.4 0.76 pts — No
85% 83.0–88.0 78.6–83.3 0.25 pts — No
80% 83.3–87.7 78.7–83.0 — pts — No
75% 83.5–87.5 78.8–82.8 — pts — No
Lexi — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.1–89.0 78.3–83.8 1.78 pts — No
90% 82.6–88.5 78.7–83.5 0.84 pts — No
85% 83.0–88.1 78.9–83.3 0.29 pts — No
80% 83.3–87.8 79.1–83.0 — pts — No
75% 83.5–87.6 79.2–82.7 — pts — No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — LAS at CON — Actual: LAS 77, CON 85
Level LAS range CON range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.5–89.6 78.3–84.0 1.44 pts — No
90% 83.1–89.1 78.6–83.1 — pts — No
85% 83.5–88.7 78.8–82.8 — pts — No
80% 83.8–88.4 79.0–82.6 — pts — No
75% 84.0–88.2 79.2–82.5 — pts — No