Clay's Almanac
Almanac — change team skin

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

Almanac
NBA
WNBA
Log in Join

← Back to WNBA

Chicago Sky at New York Liberty

CHI 66 – NY 85

August 29, 2026 · Final

Vince Chambers

Best model for this game

Vince Chambers
All models: 12-0
Prediction ranges

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

Confidence level for CHI at NY

All 12 models’ predicted scores

CHI — one dot per model NY — one dot per model Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Vince Chambers
CHI 84.6–89.9 NY 87.8–92.9 Overlap 2.09 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 90.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.3) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 85.1–89.5 NY 88.0–92.4 Overlap 1.45 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 90.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.3) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 85.3–89.2 NY 88.5–92.0 Overlap 0.72 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 90.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.3) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

CHI 85.5–89.0 NY 88.7–91.6 Overlap 0.29 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 90.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.3) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

CHI 85.7–88.8 NY 88.8–91.5 No overlap Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 90.1) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.3) — by 2.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
-20.64
p-value
1.56e-61

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

Reg
CHI 84.2–90.2 NY 86.1–92.7 Overlap 4.18 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.2) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.7–89.7 NY 86.6–92.3 Overlap 3.19 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.2) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 85.0–89.4 NY 87.2–92.0 Overlap 2.19 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.2) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 85.3–89.2 NY 87.5–91.8 Overlap 1.69 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.2) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 85.5–89.0 NY 87.9–91.6 Overlap 1.09 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 87.2) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
-15.26
p-value
7.22e-40

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

Dr. Wallace
CHI 83.7–89.8 NY 86.1–92.5 Overlap 3.71 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.3) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.1–88.9 NY 86.6–92.0 Overlap 2.29 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.3) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.4–88.6 NY 87.0–91.6 Overlap 1.67 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.3) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.8–88.5 NY 87.2–91.4 Overlap 1.31 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.3) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 85.1–88.5 NY 87.4–91.2 Overlap 1.01 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.3) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
-15.46
p-value
4.66e-41

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

Kevin
CHI 83.1–90.4 NY 85.5–93.1 Overlap 4.89 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.7–89.8 NY 86.1–92.4 Overlap 3.72 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.1–89.5 NY 86.5–92.0 Overlap 2.95 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.4–89.2 NY 86.8–91.7 Overlap 2.36 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.6–88.9 NY 87.0–91.5 Overlap 1.87 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 89.2) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
-13.22
p-value
2.33e-32

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

Dr. Lila Shah
CHI 82.7–89.6 NY 84.9–92.3 Overlap 4.66 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.2) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.0–88.7 NY 85.5–91.7 Overlap 3.15 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.2) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.2–88.6 NY 85.9–91.3 Overlap 2.64 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.2) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.6–88.4 NY 86.2–91.0 Overlap 2.18 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.2) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 83.8–88.3 NY 86.5–90.8 Overlap 1.8 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.2) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
-12.78
p-value
1.02e-30

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

Ice
CHI 83.2–90.2 NY 85.4–92.0 Overlap 4.79 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.9–89.6 NY 85.9–91.5 Overlap 3.63 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.3–89.0 NY 86.3–91.2 Overlap 2.68 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.7–88.7 NY 86.6–90.9 Overlap 2.11 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.8–88.4 NY 86.8–90.7 Overlap 1.66 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
-11.29
p-value
3.16e-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.

Jamal
CHI 83.0–90.1 NY 85.3–92.1 Overlap 4.86 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.6) — by 2.1 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.6–89.6 NY 85.8–91.6 Overlap 3.74 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.6) — by 2.1 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.0–89.2 NY 86.2–91.2 Overlap 3.01 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.6) — by 2.1 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.3–88.9 NY 86.5–90.9 Overlap 2.45 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.6) — by 2.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.5–88.7 NY 86.7–90.7 Overlap 1.98 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.7) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.6) — by 2.1 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
-11.98
p-value
9.65e-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.

Jordan
CHI 83.0–90.8 NY 86.0–91.6 Overlap 4.8 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.9) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.6–90.1 NY 86.3–91.1 Overlap 3.84 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.9) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.0–89.7 NY 86.4–90.9 Overlap 3.34 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.9) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.3–89.4 NY 86.6–90.6 Overlap 2.78 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.9) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.6–89.1 NY 86.8–90.5 Overlap 2.38 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.6) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.9) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
-9.44
p-value
7.16e-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.

Darren "Dimes" Lin
CHI 83.3–90.0 NY 85.7–92.2 Overlap 4.35 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.8–89.5 NY 86.0–91.3 Overlap 3.46 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.2–89.1 NY 86.3–91.0 Overlap 2.87 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.5–88.8 NY 86.4–90.8 Overlap 2.41 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.7–88.6 NY 86.6–90.4 Overlap 2.06 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.7) — by 1.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
-9.83
p-value
3.47e-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.

Maya Jefferson
CHI 82.9–90.2 NY 86.1–92.3 Overlap 4.14 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.5) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.5–89.6 NY 86.4–91.5 Overlap 3.25 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.5) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 83.9–89.2 NY 86.7–91.2 Overlap 2.55 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.5) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.2–88.9 NY 86.8–91.0 Overlap 2.11 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.5) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.4–88.7 NY 87.2–90.9 Overlap 1.51 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.5) — by 2.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
-12.70
p-value
2.08e-30

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

Lexi
CHI 83.6–90.3 NY 85.3–92.3 Overlap 5.0 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.0–89.6 NY 85.9–91.8 Overlap 3.69 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.6–89.1 NY 86.3–91.4 Overlap 2.83 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 84.8–88.7 NY 86.5–91.1 Overlap 2.16 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 85.0–88.3 NY 86.8–90.9 Overlap 1.54 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.8) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 2.0 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
-11.61
p-value
2.04e-26

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

Coach Sarah Watanabe
CHI 84.5–90.0 NY 84.1–92.6 Overlap 5.56 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 84.9–89.4 NY 84.8–91.9 Overlap 4.55 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 85.0–88.8 NY 85.3–91.5 Overlap 3.56 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

CHI 85.1–88.5 NY 85.6–91.2 Overlap 2.92 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

CHI 85.3–88.4 NY 85.9–90.9 Overlap 2.47 pts Actual: CHI 66, NY 85

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans New York Liberty (avg. 88.4) over Chicago Sky (avg. 86.8) — by 1.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
-8.73
p-value
1.76e-16

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

View as table
Vince Chambers — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 84.6–89.9 87.8–92.9 2.09 pts No
90% 85.1–89.5 88.0–92.4 1.45 pts No
85% 85.3–89.2 88.5–92.0 0.72 pts No
80% 85.5–89.0 88.7–91.6 0.29 pts No
75% 85.7–88.8 88.8–91.5 — pts No
Reg — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 84.2–90.2 86.1–92.7 4.18 pts No
90% 84.7–89.7 86.6–92.3 3.19 pts No
85% 85.0–89.4 87.2–92.0 2.19 pts No
80% 85.3–89.2 87.5–91.8 1.69 pts No
75% 85.5–89.0 87.9–91.6 1.09 pts No
Dr. Wallace — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.7–89.8 86.1–92.5 3.71 pts No
90% 84.1–88.9 86.6–92.0 2.29 pts No
85% 84.4–88.6 87.0–91.6 1.67 pts No
80% 84.8–88.5 87.2–91.4 1.31 pts No
75% 85.1–88.5 87.4–91.2 1.01 pts No
Kevin — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.1–90.4 85.5–93.1 4.89 pts No
90% 83.7–89.8 86.1–92.4 3.72 pts No
85% 84.1–89.5 86.5–92.0 2.95 pts No
80% 84.4–89.2 86.8–91.7 2.36 pts No
75% 84.6–88.9 87.0–91.5 1.87 pts No
Dr. Lila Shah — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.7–89.6 84.9–92.3 4.66 pts No
90% 83.0–88.7 85.5–91.7 3.15 pts No
85% 83.2–88.6 85.9–91.3 2.64 pts No
80% 83.6–88.4 86.2–91.0 2.18 pts No
75% 83.8–88.3 86.5–90.8 1.8 pts No
Ice — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.2–90.2 85.4–92.0 4.79 pts No
90% 83.9–89.6 85.9–91.5 3.63 pts No
85% 84.3–89.0 86.3–91.2 2.68 pts No
80% 84.7–88.7 86.6–90.9 2.11 pts No
75% 84.8–88.4 86.8–90.7 1.66 pts No
Jamal — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.0–90.1 85.3–92.1 4.86 pts No
90% 83.6–89.6 85.8–91.6 3.74 pts No
85% 84.0–89.2 86.2–91.2 3.01 pts No
80% 84.3–88.9 86.5–90.9 2.45 pts No
75% 84.5–88.7 86.7–90.7 1.98 pts No
Jordan — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.0–90.8 86.0–91.6 4.8 pts No
90% 83.6–90.1 86.3–91.1 3.84 pts No
85% 84.0–89.7 86.4–90.9 3.34 pts No
80% 84.3–89.4 86.6–90.6 2.78 pts No
75% 84.6–89.1 86.8–90.5 2.38 pts No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.3–90.0 85.7–92.2 4.35 pts No
90% 83.8–89.5 86.0–91.3 3.46 pts No
85% 84.2–89.1 86.3–91.0 2.87 pts No
80% 84.5–88.8 86.4–90.8 2.41 pts No
75% 84.7–88.6 86.6–90.4 2.06 pts No
Maya Jefferson — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.9–90.2 86.1–92.3 4.14 pts No
90% 83.5–89.6 86.4–91.5 3.25 pts No
85% 83.9–89.2 86.7–91.2 2.55 pts No
80% 84.2–88.9 86.8–91.0 2.11 pts No
75% 84.4–88.7 87.2–90.9 1.51 pts No
Lexi — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.6–90.3 85.3–92.3 5.0 pts No
90% 84.0–89.6 85.9–91.8 3.69 pts No
85% 84.6–89.1 86.3–91.4 2.83 pts No
80% 84.8–88.7 86.5–91.1 2.16 pts No
75% 85.0–88.3 86.8–90.9 1.54 pts No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — CHI at NY — Actual: CHI 66, NY 85
Level CHI range NY range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 84.5–90.0 84.1–92.6 5.56 pts No
90% 84.9–89.4 84.8–91.9 4.55 pts No
85% 85.0–88.8 85.3–91.5 3.56 pts No
80% 85.1–88.5 85.6–91.2 2.92 pts No
75% 85.3–88.4 85.9–90.9 2.47 pts No