← role_gated_lineedges · WNBA
2026-10-07
Day by day
Latest 1 graded days from the same CORE benchmark shown in the headline, charts and sheet: role_gated_lineedges.
82–19 · 81% · +1.60u across the last 1 days
10/0782–1981%+1.60u2 games
LVA @ GSV36–9−0.96u
- Kaila Charles Under 1.5 AST2 vs 1.5no clean explanationCharles hit the Over with just 2 assists in 17 minutes—a modest volume, but enough to clear the 1.5 line despite negligible offensive production (1-3 FG, 12% usage). She stayed out of foul trouble (2 PF) and got enough floor time to record that second helper.
- A'ja Wilson Over 25.5 PTS24 vs 25.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upWilson fell just short despite efficient shooting (9-16 FG, 6-6 FT) because she generated only 24 points in 36 minutes with 29% usage—she needed one more scoring possession to clear 25.5. The tight margin suggests near-elite efficiency couldn't overcome modest shot volume on the night.
- A'ja Wilson Over 24.5 PTS24 vs 24.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upWilson fell one point short despite efficient shooting (9-16 FG, 6-6 FT) because she didn't get enough volume—29% usage and 36 minutes limited her shot diet just enough to miss the over by a single point.
- Tiffany Hayes Under 14.5 PTS21 vs 14.5no clean explanationHayes torched the under by shooting 8-8 from the free-throw line and 6-10 overall (78% TS) in just 16 minutes, combining elite efficiency with high usage (40%) to exceed the 14.5-point line despite limited playing time.
- Jackie Young Over 2.5 REB0 vs 2.5no clean explanationYoung played 37 minutes but grabbed zero rebounds despite logging heavy usage (18%), suggesting she was positioned as a perimeter facilitator rather than a rebounder in this game. Five personal fouls may have also limited her ability to pursue boards aggressively near the basket.
- Jackie Young Over 14.5 PTS14 vs 14.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationYoung fell just short despite playing 37 minutes and attempting 13 shots, held back by poor 2-7 field-goal shooting (29%) that limited her to exactly 14 points. She stayed efficient from three (2-4) and the free-throw line (8-10), but the lack of makes from the floor left her one point shy of the over.
NYL @ ATL46–10+2.56u
- Breanna Stewart Under 29.5 PTS35 vs 29.5no clean explanationStewart's elite efficiency—11-21 FG (52%) and 11-13 FT (85%)—combined with 43 minutes and 32% usage to propel her 5.5 points over the line. Her 66% true shooting was well above her season average, and the high volume of free throws (13 attempts) proved decisive in busting the under.
- Pauline Astier Over 2.5 REB1 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAstier managed only 1 rebound in 14 minutes despite taking 6 shots, as her limited floor time and lack of offensive rebounding opportunities kept her well short of the 2.5 mark. Her 25% usage rate and early foul trouble (1 PF in sparse minutes) restricted her ability to crash the glass consistently.
- DeWanna Bonner Under 2.5 AST3 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBonner hit the over by one assist despite shooting poorly (2-11 FG), as her 34 minutes of floor time and ball-handling role kept her in position to record multiple dimes even when her scoring touch abandoned her.
- Pauline Astier Over 3.5 REB1 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAstier played just 14 minutes and grabbed only 1 rebound, far short of the 3.5 over; limited run and a modest usage rate (25%) kept her off the glass and unable to accumulate boards.
- Angel Reese Under 19.5 PTS23 vs 19.5no clean explanationReese's elite 62% true shooting—fueled by a perfect 6-6 from the free-throw line and efficient 8-16 field-goal clip—pushed her past 19.5 despite modest 23% usage, as she logged all 39 available minutes and capitalized on every scoring opportunity in a blowout win (+11).
- Angel Reese Over 7.5 REB7 vs 7.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationReese fell one rebound short despite playing 39 minutes and logging 23% usage, held back by foul trouble (5 PF) that likely limited her interior activity and rebounding opportunities late in the game.
Each eligible priced formula signal is normalized to a flat 1-unit outcome at its recorded price. Voids are excluded from the record, hit rate, and units. Open a day for the per-game split and loss review.