WNBA · Finalupdated 08:00 UTC

Indiana Fever vs Chicago Sky

at Chicago Sky

IND expected to win by about 4.5 · both teams together expected to score about 187.5 points · odds to win: IND 1.60, CHI 2.30

Game odds from 4 bookmakers, Sat 21:34 UTC

IND 113 – CHI 90

Final · 5 of 8 picks won

8 picks checked: 5 won, 3 lost.

Getting a better price than most bookmakers offer for the same line is the only thing on this page that, measured over many past bets, made money; player rates are context, not tips.

Explore every player and prop

How to read this page

A pick is a player line, for example Under 13.5 points, that we published before the game together with the price we found for it. We do not take bets.
Odds are shown in the decimal format: 1.93 means you get back 1.93 for every 1 staked, so a higher number pays more. The American format (−108 means risk 108 to win 100; +111 means risk 100 to win 111) appears only in the Data log at the bottom of the page.
'Posted at' is the price we found when we published the pick; 'better' is a higher price for the same line at another bookmaker. Taking the better price is the one thing on this page that, measured over many past bets, made money.
'Market puts Under at 48.5%' is the chance implied by all bookmakers' prices together, with their built-in margin removed. Pinnacle is a bookmaker whose prices are widely treated as the most accurate reference, so it is the one we compare against.
A player's rate is how often that player has gone over the line this season, for example over in 41 of 78 games (52.6%), with a likely range such as 32–52%: fewer games means a wider range, and under 10 games we show no rate word at all.
'Past record stronger than the price' means the whole likely range sits above the chance the bookmakers' price implies; 'weaker' means below; 'agrees with the price' means the price sits inside the range, which is the usual case. None of these is a tip.
'Not measurable' is the usual honest answer: too few games to tell a real difference from chance.
'What could go wrong' lists the facts that can change a line: who is out, whether the starting lineup is confirmed, expected playing time (RotoWire's estimate, typically off by about 4 minutes), rest, and how many bookmakers price each line.
After the final, every pick is checked against the official stats and compared with the last price before the game started, the market's most informed price; getting a better price than that is the fairest test of a pick, whether or not it won. A tie means the player landed exactly on the line and the stake is returned; lines ending in .5 cannot tie.
Results are given for every 1 staked: 'would have returned +0.93' means a stake of 1 would have come back with 0.93 in profit. We do not stake anything; the record is what a stake of 1 on each pick would have done. Our record counts a smaller stake when the price advantage was small.
S beside a name marks an expected starter. Times are shown in your device's time zone; our data is recorded in US Eastern Time (ET). Team codes are the league's three-letter abbreviations.
'Your prediction' lets you pick Over or Under on any line before the game starts; we check your predictions the same way and keep your record, and one game of results proves nothing.
Team codes on this page: IND = Indiana Fever, CHI = Chicago Sky.

Picks and prices

Odds of at least 1.70 only · highest odds first · results checked

A line is the number a bookmaker sets, e.g. 13.5 points; Over means more than it, Under fewer. Odds 1.93 pay 1.93 for every 1 staked. 'Posted at' is the price we found when we published the pick; after the game it is compared with the last price before the start.

S. Taylor · Over 14.5 pointsLostPosted at 1.94 · last price before start 1.67Lost −1.00 per 1 staked

Posted at 1.94 · Our price was 8.5% higher than the last price before the start (good: a higher price pays more per 1 staked).

Pinnacle, the reference bookmaker, does not offer this line

First offered at 1.88 by Pinnacle (Sun 14:38 UTC); latest 1.79 at Pinnacle (Sun 21:22 UTC). The line moved from 14.5 to 15.5.

Re-checked 1 h before the start not re-checked

In our results this pick counts as a stake of 1.15 (standard 1); smaller when the price gap is small.

N. Cloud · Over 11.5 pointsWonPosted at 1.88 · last price before start 1.76Won +0.88 per 1 staked

M. Billings · Under 8.5 pointsWonPosted at 1.88 · last price before start 1.83Won +0.88 per 1 staked

K. Mitchell · Over 24.5 pointsWonPosted at 1.87 · last price before start 1.77Won +0.87 per 1 staked

C. Clark · Under 25.5 pointsLostPosted at 1.84 · last price before start 1.79Lost −1.00 per 1 staked

M. Timpson · Over 6.5 pointsWonPosted at 1.77 · last price before start 1.76Won +0.77 per 1 staked

M. Billings · Under 5.5 reboundsWonPosted at 1.75 · last price before start 1.98Won +0.75 per 1 staked

K. Cardoso · Over 8.5 reboundsLostPosted at 1.74 · last price before start 1.74Lost −1.00 per 1 staked

Why the better price matters

In our past tests, simply taking the highest price offered for a line earned more than any of our own forecasts did.

In that test (25 Aug 2026), taking the best price returned about 2.8 more for every 100 staked than the price we posted did.

The players

10 players checked · 6 whose past record points the other way from the bookmakers' price · 1 out · 0 with too few games

Rate: the share of this season's games in which the player finished above tonight's line. S beside a name marks an expected starter.

Against this opponent, 2 of 11 players have performed clearly differently and 2 show a slight hint

Context only A player's rate describes the past; it is not a tip and has not been tested as one. Expected minutes come from RotoWire, a lineup news service.

Sign in to see each player's rate The numbers below (for example 15.5 points) are the lines the bookmakers actually posted.

Indiana Feverplaying CHI

SCaitlin Clark · 34 min expected

points 23.5 → 37 actual

SKelsey Mitchell · 34 min expected

points 24.5 → 30 actual

SMakayla Timpson · 32 min expected

points 6.5 → 12 actual

SMonique Billings · 28 min expected

rebounds 5.5 → 5 actual

SLexie Hull · 18 min expected

points 5.5 → 14 actual

Sophie Cunningham · 25 min expected

3-pointers 1.5 → 1 actual

Aliyah Boston · Out · right leg

points 15.5 → did not play, so no result

5 players have no line from any bookmaker: Hines-Allen (12 expected minutes) · Harris (12 min) · +3 more

Chicago Skyplaying IND

SNatasha Cloud · 32 min expected

points 11.5 → 16 actual

SKamilla Cardoso · 28 min expected

rebounds 8.5 → 6 actual

SAzura Stevens · 25 min expected

points + rebounds 17.5 → 22 actual

SSydney Taylor · 20 min expected

points 14.5 → 4 actual

6 players have no line from any bookmaker: Vandersloot (28 expected minutes) · Coulibaly (15 min) · +4 more

What could go wrong

updated 08:00 UTC

Who is out

Jaquez · did not play last game

Boston · earlier listed as likely to play, now available (changed Tue 21:45 UTC) · 30, 25 and 13 min in the last 3 games

Billings · new starter

Out Diggins · right knee · CHI

Lineups

Starting lineup confirmed (Sun 23:00 UTC) · RotoWire, a lineup news service, as of game start

Playing time

3 players are expected to play at least 5 minutes more or fewer than in the last 5 games. For 4 players (VanSlooten, Johnson, Coulibaly, Sheldon) we have no real minutes estimate, only a default.

Timpson: expected to play 32 minutes, averaged 18.0 in the last 5 games, about 14.0 more than usual

Billings: expected to play 28 minutes, averaged 11.4 in the last 5 games, about 16.6 more than usual

Cloud: expected to play 32 minutes, averaged 24.3 in the last 5 games, about 7.7 more than usual

Our check: these minute estimates (RotoWire) are typically off by about 4 minutes.

Rest

IND also played the day before this game.

Bookmakers

The reference bookmaker, Pinnacle, offers 9 of the 102 lines; the rest rely on other bookmakers.

Every pick is priced by at least 2 bookmakers.

Looking back

Flagged before the game: Jaquez out · did not play

Flagged before the game: Boston out (Tue 21:45 UTC) · did not play

Billings new starter · started, 18.6 min

1 expected player did not play

When a player is out, that player's lines are removed: in our past results this helped. Guessing which teammates benefit was also tested and lost money, so nothing else on this page is adjusted for it.

What happened

In 1 of 6 cases where a player's past record disagreed with the bookmakers' price, the past record was right in this game. One game proves nothing.

Final · 5 of 8 picks won5 won, 3 lost · +1.14 if you had staked 1 on each · our prices on average 1.4% higher than the last before the start · 15 lines checked, 7 scored but not picked · checked Tue 23:52 UTC

Makayla Timpson · points 6.5 → 12 · 5.5 above the line · played 28.2 min (32 expected)

Pick: Over 6.5 at 1.77 → Won +0.77 per 1 staked

Sydney Taylor · points 14.5 → 4 · 10.5 below the line · played 17.5 min (20 expected)

Pick: Over 14.5 at 1.94 → Lost −1.00 per 1 staked · our note: the shots did not fall

Natasha Cloud · points 11.5 → 16 · 4.5 above the line · played 29.8 min (32 expected)

Pick: Over 11.5 at 1.88 → Won +0.88 per 1 staked

Kamilla Cardoso · rebounds 8.5 → 6 · 2.5 below the line · played 24.2 min (28 expected)

Pick: Over 8.5 at 1.74 → Lost −1.00 per 1 staked · our note: no single cause

Kelsey Mitchell · points 24.5 → 30 · 5.5 above the line · played 35.3 min (34 expected)

Pick: Over 24.5 at 1.87 → Won +0.87 per 1 staked

Monique Billings · rebounds 5.5 → 5 · 0.5 below the line · played 18.6 min (28 expected)

Pick: Under 5.5 at 1.75 → Won +0.75 per 1 staked

5 other players with a posted line

Lexie Hull · points 5.5 → 14 · 8.5 above the line · played 25.8 min (18 expected) · no final price

Caitlin Clark · points 23.5 → 37 · 13.5 above the line · played 32.2 min (34 expected) · no final price

Sophie Cunningham · 3-pointers 1.5 → 1 · 0.5 below the line · played 11.2 min (25 expected) · no final price

Azura Stevens · points + rebounds 17.5 → 22 · 4.5 above the line · played 23 min (25 expected) · FanDuel odds: Over 1.91, Under 1.82

Aliyah Boston · points 15.5 → did not play, so no result · no final price

Each prediction is recorded as if you had staked 1 at the line you saw, and your record is shown here. One game tells you nothing yet.

More context

Head to head

CHI vs IND · last 19 games · IND leads · CHI record 6–13 · average score 84.1–91.3 · CHI has lost by 7.2 on average

Team results are background only; they say nothing about any single player's line.

23 Aug · IND 113 at CHI 90CHI lost

8 Aug · IND 90 at CHI 86CHI lost

11 Jun · CHI 106 at IND 114CHI lost

5 Sep · CHI 77 at IND 97CHI lost

What each defense gives up per game

IND gives up90.7 points · 31.9 rebounds · 20.9 assists · 8.1 three-pointers scored against them · opponents make 46.2% of shots · 33.9% from three-point range · 12.7 opponent turnovers

CHI gives up90.7 points · 37.1 rebounds · 20.7 assists · 8.2 three-pointers scored against them · opponents make 44.9% of shots · 33.8% from three-point range · 12.9 opponent turnovers

Defense by position

How much this is worth

Defense-by-position numbers are mostly random from season to season; shown for context only. We tested it: a team's defense-by-position numbers from one half of the season do not predict the other half, so treat them as noise.

IND gives up 90.7 points a game · 11th of 15 · league average 87.1+3.6 vs average

CHI gives up 90.7 points a game · 12th of 15 · league average 87.1+3.6 vs average

How the game odds moved

Betsson first had IND expected to win by 7.5, expected total 185.5 (Sat 13:18 UTC) and had not changed it by Sat 21:34 UTC.

The odds at the top of the page are the latest we have, from every bookmaker on file; this is one bookmaker's own history.

Data log (technical)

Technical detail for auditing; the plain version is above. Internal ids and formula names print here only.

Line-shopping measurement: project_conditional_minutes_refuted

Defense-by-position measurement: split-half reliability r = -0.033 across 12 cells (7 of 12 negative) against a shuffle null of 0.000; a placebo using the wrong position family reproduced the effect to within 0.12pp · project_dvp_blowout_gate_refuted · 2026-08-26

Our picks, raw · 10

Sydney Taylor · O 14.5 points−106value_edge_pct +4.39 · kelly 1.15u · price_check unchecked · rank 2

Kelsey Mitchell · O 24.5 points−115value_edge_pct −0.46 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 4

Natasha Cloud · O 11.5 points−114value_edge_pct −1.96 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 9

Monique Billings · U 8.5 points−114value_edge_pct −2.56 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 12

Monique Billings · U 5.5 rebounds−134value_edge_pct −3.59 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 13

Monique Billings · U 4.5 rebounds+120value_edge_pct −3.83 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 14

Makayla Timpson · O 6.5 points−130value_edge_pct −4.09 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 16

Kamilla Cardoso · O 8.5 rebounds−136value_edge_pct −4.20 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 18

Monique Billings · U 9.5 points−122value_edge_pct −4.29 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 21

Caitlin Clark · U 25.5 points−119value_edge_pct −4.94 · kelly 0.00u · price_check unchecked · rank 31

Checked results, raw (basketball-stats shorthand) · 15

Kelsey Mitchell Over 1.5 ASTWIN +0.56ubet −177 → close −177 · CLV +0.0¢ · bet_clv:353483 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 A · p_hit 61.4% · actual 4 · 35.3 min · startedMitchell's elite efficiency (71% TS on 26% usage) and heavy ball-handling role kept her on the floor for all 35 minutes, allowing her to accumulate 4 assists while shouldering primary scoring duties. The zero turnovers on zero turnovers despite high volume further enabled her playmaking opportunities in a blowout (+28) where Indiana controlled pace.

Natasha Cloud Over 10.5 PTSWIN +0.60ubet −167 → close −175 · CLV +1.1¢ · bet_clv:353479 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 A · p_hit 60.0% · actual 16 · 29.8 min · startedCloud's elite 81% true shooting on 21% usage—including a perfect 7-9 from the field—powered her well past the 10.5 line; she was efficient enough to reach 16 points despite below-average volume, staying out of foul trouble in 30 minutes.

Sydney Taylor Over 1.5 ASTWIN +0.63ubet −160 → close −160 · CLV +0.0¢ · bet_clv:353477 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 B · p_hit 58.4% · actual 2 · 17.5 min · benchTaylor hit the over on a modest line despite a rough shooting night (2-9 FG), as her 18 minutes of run and 25% usage rate gave her enough ball-handling opportunities to reach 2 dimes.

Sydney Taylor Over 1.5 REBLOSS −1.00ubet −188 → close −188 · CLV +0.0¢ · bet_clv:353476 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 A · p_hit 61.9% · unexplained · actual 0 · 17.5 min · benchTaylor drew 3 fouls in 18 minutes, limiting her rebounding opportunities and forcing her to play cautiously on the glass; combined with poor shooting (2-9 FG, 0-6 3PT), she generated zero boards despite moderate usage at 25%.

Monique Billings Under 4.5 REBLOSS −1.00ubet +120 → close +120 · CLV +0.0¢ · bet_clv:356676 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 PASS · p_hit 43.7% · unexplained · actual 5 · 18.6 min · benchBillings grabbed exactly 5 rebounds in 19 minutes, just clearing the 4.5 bar despite modest offensive involvement (16% usage); she was efficient on the glass relative to her limited shot diet and playing time.

Kelsey Mitchell Over 24.5 PTSWIN +0.87ubet −115 → close −130 · CLV +3.0¢ · bet_clv:353481 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 C · p_hit 53.2% · actual 30 · 35.3 min · startedMitchell's elite 71% true shooting on 26% usage—fueled by a scorching 6-9 from three—easily cleared the 24.5 line despite modest volume, finishing at 30 points in 35 minutes. She stayed out of foul trouble (2 PF) and turned the ball over zero times, allowing her to play heavy minutes and maximize efficiency.

Makayla Timpson Over 6.5 PTSWIN +0.77ubet −130 → close −132 · CLV +0.4¢ · bet_clv:353484 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 C · p_hit 54.2% · actual 12 · 28.2 min · started

Caitlin Clark Under 25.5 PTSLOSS −1.00ubet −119 → close −126 · CLV +1.4¢ · bet_clv:356678 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 PASS · p_hit 51.7% · conversion_unlucky · actual 37 · 32.2 min · startedClark torched the line on elite efficiency, shooting 54% from three and 75% overall on high volume (41% usage) with zero fouls allowing her to stay on the court all 32 minutes. The combination of hot shooting and unrestricted playing time pushed her well past 25.5 points.

Kelsey Mitchell Under 2.5 REBWIN +0.53ubet −187 → close −215 · CLV +3.1¢ · bet_clv:353482 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 A · p_hit 63.0% · actual 2 · 35.3 min · startedMitchell erupted for 30 points on efficient 71% true shooting but stayed off the glass with just 2 rebounds in 35 minutes, relying almost entirely on perimeter scoring (6-for-9 from three) rather than attacking the paint for offensive boards. Her high usage rate (26%) channeled into scoring volume rather than rebounding opportunity, keeping her well clear of the 2.5 threshold.

Sydney Taylor Over 14.5 PTSLOSS −1.00ubet −106 → close −150 · CLV +8.5¢ · bet_clv:353475 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 C · p_hit 53.7% · conversion_unlucky · actual 4 · 17.5 min · benchTaylor's shot completely abandoned her, connecting on just 2-of-9 from the field and 0-of-6 from three for a 22% true shooting percentage in 18 minutes. The combination of brutal efficiency and limited playing time (likely due to three fouls) left her far short of the 14.5-point line.

Kamilla Cardoso Over 8.5 REBLOSS −1.00ubet −136 → close −136 · CLV +0.0¢ · bet_clv:353480 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 B · p_hit 55.2% · unexplained · actual 6 · 24.2 min · startedCardoso fell short of 8.5 boards with just 6 rebounds despite 24 minutes of run, hampered by early foul trouble (5 PF) that limited her interior presence and a lopsided team performance (-31 +/-) that kept Chicago out of rebounding situations.

Natasha Cloud Over 11.5 PTSWIN +0.88ubet −114 → close −132 · CLV +3.6¢ · bet_clv:353478 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 C · p_hit 52.2% · actual 16 · 29.8 min · startedCloud's efficient 7-9 shooting (78% FG) and 30 minutes of run drove her well past the line, as she converted at an elite 81% true shooting despite attempting no threes. Her high usage rate (21%) and volume from the field—nine shot attempts in a half-court role—provided the scoring floor needed to eclipse 11.5.

Monique Billings Under 8.5 PTSWIN +0.88ubet −114 → close −120 · CLV +1.3¢ · bet_clv:356675 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 PASS · p_hit 51.9% · actual 6 · 18.6 min · benchBillings managed just 6 points on 3-6 shooting (50 TS%) in 19 minutes, staying well below the 8.5 line largely due to limited usage (16%) and minimal free-throw opportunities (0-0 FT). Her efficiency was decent but volume constraints—both in minutes and shot selection—kept her total output modest.

Monique Billings Under 5.5 REBWIN +0.75ubet −134 → close −102 · CLV −6.8¢ · bet_clv:356677 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 B · p_hit 55.2% · actual 5 · 18.6 min · benchBillings landed exactly at 5 rebounds in just 19 minutes, staying under the 5.5 line despite solid efficiency; limited minutes and a relatively quiet night on the glass kept her well short of the over.

Monique Billings Under 9.5 PTSWIN +0.82ubet −122 → close −122 · CLV +0.0¢ · bet_clv:359890 · priced_lineedges · captured 2026-08-23T00:00:00Z · grade_v2 C · p_hit 52.6% · actual 6 · 18.6 min · benchBillings shot just 3-for-6 from the field despite playing 19 minutes, and her 16% usage rate limited her scoring opportunities in a game where she fouled out early with 4 fouls, keeping her well short of the 9.5-point line.

Data fetches · 52

sds history (h2h)ok · 49 ms

sds defense/team (away)ok 200 · 51 ms

sds analytics opponent_defense (away)ok 200 · 52 ms

sds rest/team (away)ok 200 · 54 ms

sds rest/team (home)ok 200 · 55 ms

grading picks/nightlyok 200 · 65 ms

sds schedule/team (meetings)ok · 69 ms

sds analytics opponent_defense (home)ok 200 · 75 ms

sds games/{id}/boxscoreok 200 · 203 ms

sds lineups/{id}ok 200 · 205 ms

sds injuries/date/{date}ok 200 · 207 ms

sds defense/team (home)ok 200 · 209 ms

sds games/{id}ok 200 · 212 ms

grading clv/picksok 200 · 190 ms

dh lineups/{id}/deltaok 200 · 536 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 600 ms

odds player timeline (rebounds)ok 200 · 678 ms

odds player timeline (rebounds)ok 200 · 683 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 687 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 830 ms

odds game timelineok 200 · 901 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 843 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 900 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 996 ms

grading verdict/boardok 200 · 3044 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 11 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 34 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 36 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 37 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 39 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 40 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (points)ok 200 · 51 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 54 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (points)ok 200 · 58 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (points)ok 200 · 73 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 88 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 117 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (points)ok 200 · 123 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 128 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (three_pointers_made)ok 200 · 148 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (rebounds)ok 200 · 151 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (points)ok 200 · 156 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (pr)ok 200 · 157 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (rebounds)ok 200 · 160 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 167 ms

sds analytics player_vs_teamok 200 · 168 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (points)ok 200 · 174 ms

sds analytics player_vs_line (points)ok 200 · 190 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 482 ms

odds player timeline (pr)ok 200 · 543 ms

odds player timeline (threes)ok 200 · 551 ms

odds player timeline (points)ok 200 · 610 ms

Classic view →

The older, longer version of this page is still available as the classic view. Nothing there is tracked in our results; this page is.