VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

Virtua Fighter 5 REVO · v1.10 · Character Matchup Winrates

Akira vs Pai

Akira vs Pai in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Akira wins 50.2% of 11,523 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 0 of 10 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted11,523
Win rate50.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.4 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Akira's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open53.6%+3.40.107545
Half fence52.3%+2.10.1361,120
Open51.8%+1.60.2211,309
Full fence51.5%+1.30.3621,083
Octagon50.3%+0.10.9621,102
Single wall49.8%-0.40.7631,141
Rectangle49.5%-0.70.6291,231
Breakable half fence49.4%-0.80.5291,272
Low fence47.2%-3.00.0401,037
Breakable full fence47.1%-3.00.0311,122
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches: p on its own only, not corrected, coloured or ranked

Matchups with a stage played at least 80 times: 181. With a stage that survives correction: 13. Expected from chance alone: about 9.1.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

Akira's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 15.22 on 9 df, p 0.085

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.5%1,083+4.40.040-0.80.708+2.10.298+4.40.044+1.70.411-2.10.434-0.30.895+2.00.344+1.20.559
Breakable full fence-4.40.04047.1%1,122-5.20.014-2.20.277-0.00.997-2.60.210-6.40.014-4.70.022-2.40.244-3.10.141
Half fence+0.80.708+5.20.01452.3%1,120+3.00.150+5.20.017+2.50.227-1.30.630+0.50.796+2.80.180+2.00.334
Breakable half fence-2.10.298+2.20.277-3.00.15049.4%1,272+2.20.289-0.40.841-4.20.100-2.40.218-0.20.927-0.90.661
Low fence-4.40.044+0.00.997-5.20.017-2.20.28947.2%1,037-2.60.221-6.40.015-4.60.026-2.40.255-3.10.149
Single wall-1.70.411+2.60.210-2.50.227+0.40.841+2.60.22149.8%1,141-3.80.145-2.00.320+0.20.912-0.50.816
Fence and open+2.10.434+6.40.014+1.30.630+4.20.100+6.40.015+3.80.14553.6%545+1.80.484+4.00.118+3.30.207
Open+0.30.895+4.70.022-0.50.796+2.40.218+4.60.026+2.00.320-1.80.48451.8%1,309+2.20.259+1.50.456
Rectangle-2.00.344+2.40.244-2.80.180+0.20.927+2.40.255-0.20.912-4.00.118-2.20.25949.5%1,231-0.70.729
Octagon-1.20.559+3.10.141-2.00.334+0.90.661+3.10.149+0.50.816-3.30.207-1.50.456+0.70.72950.3%1,102
Better on the row's stage — deeper at 5 and 10 pointsBetter on the column's stagep < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches on one side of the comparison

Matchups with two stages each played at least 80 times: 180. With a stage-against-stage difference that survives correction: 12. Expected from chance alone: about 9.0.

How significance is decided
  • Each gap is two win rates compared with a pooled two-proportion z test, over decided matches only.
  • The 95% interval is Newcombe's hybrid score method, which keeps its shape near 0% and 100% where a symmetric interval does not.
  • q is p corrected for how many tests were asked at once, by Benjamini–Hochberg at a 5% false discovery rate. A figure is called real on q, never on p alone.
  • Standard errors are widened by a measured design effect, because one player appears in many matches and those matches are not independent of each other.
  • Stages are assigned at random, so a gap between them is the stage's own effect and not a difference in who chose to play where.
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted7,069
Win rate49.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.8 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Akira's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Open52.1%+2.70.103789
Half fence51.5%+2.20.231691
Fence and open50.7%+1.40.602349
Octagon50.6%+1.20.499678
Full fence50.5%+1.10.555636
Single wall49.7%+0.40.837716
Rectangle48.0%-1.40.417804
Breakable half fence47.8%-1.60.360774
Low fence45.8%-3.60.060627
Breakable full fence45.6%-3.80.037689
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches: p on its own only, not corrected, coloured or ranked

Matchups with a stage played at least 80 times: 158. With a stage that survives correction: 14. Expected from chance alone: about 7.9.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

Akira's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 13.09 on 9 df, p 0.159

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.5%636+4.90.075-1.10.703+2.70.319+4.70.095+0.80.783-0.20.941-1.60.543+2.50.353-0.10.966
Breakable full fence-4.90.07545.6%689-6.00.027-2.20.393-0.20.942-4.20.120-5.20.117-6.50.012-2.40.347-5.00.063
Half fence+1.10.703+6.00.02751.5%691+3.70.156+5.80.037+1.80.500+0.80.807-0.60.826+3.50.176+0.90.731
Breakable half fence-2.70.319+2.20.393-3.70.15647.8%774+2.00.449-1.90.459-2.90.366-4.30.090-0.20.935-2.80.289
Low fence-4.70.095+0.20.942-5.80.037-2.00.44945.8%627-4.00.149-5.00.138-6.30.018-2.20.400-4.80.082
Single wall-0.80.783+4.20.120-1.80.500+1.90.459+4.00.14949.7%716-1.00.760-2.40.358+1.70.505-0.90.746
Fence and open+0.20.941+5.20.117-0.80.807+2.90.366+5.00.138+1.00.76050.7%349-1.40.669+2.70.398+0.10.969
Open+1.60.543+6.50.012+0.60.826+4.30.090+6.30.018+2.40.358+1.40.66952.1%789+4.10.103+1.50.566
Rectangle-2.50.353+2.40.347-3.50.176+0.20.935+2.20.400-1.70.505-2.70.398-4.10.10348.0%804-2.60.322
Octagon+0.10.966+5.00.063-0.90.731+2.80.289+4.80.082+0.90.746-0.10.969-1.50.566+2.60.32250.6%678
Better on the row's stage — deeper at 5 and 10 pointsBetter on the column's stagep < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches on one side of the comparison

Matchups with two stages each played at least 80 times: 152. With a stage-against-stage difference that survives correction: 11. Expected from chance alone: about 7.6.

How significance is decided
  • Each gap is two win rates compared with a pooled two-proportion z test, over decided matches only.
  • The 95% interval is Newcombe's hybrid score method, which keeps its shape near 0% and 100% where a symmetric interval does not.
  • q is p corrected for how many tests were asked at once, by Benjamini–Hochberg at a 5% false discovery rate. A figure is called real on q, never on p alone.
  • Standard errors are widened by a measured design effect, because one player appears in many matches and those matches are not independent of each other.
  • Stages are assigned at random, so a gap between them is the stage's own effect and not a difference in who chose to play where.
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted3,908
Win rate51.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches7.5 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Akira's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open58.9%+7.50.042175
Full fence52.8%+1.50.541394
Half fence52.7%+1.40.579370
Breakable half fence52.2%+0.80.711439
Rectangle52.0%+0.70.774367
Open51.0%-0.40.868465
Low fence50.0%-1.30.590370
Breakable full fence49.7%-1.60.511384
Single wall49.6%-1.70.484365
Octagon48.0%-3.40.174367
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches: p on its own only, not corrected, coloured or ranked

Matchups with a stage played at least 80 times: 157. With a stage that survives correction: 11. Expected from chance alone: about 7.9.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

Akira's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 7.57 on 9 df, p 0.578

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.8%394+3.00.394+0.10.980+0.60.856+2.80.440+3.20.378-6.10.180+1.80.594+0.80.836+4.80.182
Breakable full fence-3.00.39449.7%384-3.00.416-2.40.488-0.30.943+0.10.967-9.10.045-1.20.722-2.30.528+1.80.625
Half fence-0.10.980+3.00.41652.7%370+0.50.879+2.70.462+3.10.398-6.20.178+1.70.618+0.70.858+4.70.198
Breakable half fence-0.60.856+2.40.488-0.50.87952.2%439+2.20.540+2.60.467-6.70.133+1.20.719+0.10.973+4.20.234
Low fence-2.80.440+0.30.943-2.70.462-2.20.54050.0%370+0.40.911-8.90.053-1.00.781-2.00.579+2.00.579
Single wall-3.20.378-0.10.967-3.10.398-2.60.467-0.40.91149.6%365-9.30.044-1.40.693-2.50.507+1.60.659
Fence and open+6.10.180+9.10.045+6.20.178+6.70.133+8.90.053+9.30.04458.9%175+7.90.075+6.80.137+10.90.018
Open-1.80.594+1.20.722-1.70.618-1.20.719+1.00.781+1.40.693-7.90.07551.0%465-1.10.758+3.00.388
Rectangle-0.80.836+2.30.528-0.70.858-0.10.973+2.00.579+2.50.507-6.80.137+1.10.75852.0%367+4.10.268
Octagon-4.80.182-1.80.625-4.70.198-4.20.234-2.00.579-1.60.659-10.90.018-3.00.388-4.10.26848.0%367
Better on the row's stage — deeper at 5 and 10 pointsBetter on the column's stagep < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches on one side of the comparison

Matchups with two stages each played at least 80 times: 152. With a stage-against-stage difference that survives correction: 8. Expected from chance alone: about 7.6.

How significance is decided
  • Each gap is two win rates compared with a pooled two-proportion z test, over decided matches only.
  • The 95% interval is Newcombe's hybrid score method, which keeps its shape near 0% and 100% where a symmetric interval does not.
  • q is p corrected for how many tests were asked at once, by Benjamini–Hochberg at a 5% false discovery rate. A figure is called real on q, never on p alone.
  • Standard errors are widened by a measured design effect, because one player appears in many matches and those matches are not independent of each other.
  • Stages are assigned at random, so a gap between them is the stage's own effect and not a difference in who chose to play where.
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted546
Win rate53.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Akira's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Octagon61.4%+8.30.18557 ·
Half fence59.3%+6.20.31259 ·
Fence and open57.1%+4.00.70621 ·
Rectangle55.0%+1.90.75660 ·
Full fence54.7%+1.60.80653 ·
Open54.5%+1.40.82255 ·
Single wall51.7%-1.40.81260 ·
Breakable half fence49.1%-4.00.51959 ·
Breakable full fence49.0%-4.10.54349 ·
Low fence42.5%-10.60.16240 ·
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches: p on its own only, not corrected, coloured or ranked

No stage in this matchup has been played 80 times yet, so none is tested or ranked.

Matchups with a stage played at least 80 times: 23. With a stage that survives correction: 1. Expected from chance alone: about 1.2.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

Akira's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 5.33 on 9 df, p 0.804

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.7%53+5.70.562-4.60.623+5.60.556+12.20.243+3.00.746-2.40.850+0.20.986-0.30.976-6.70.477
Breakable full fence-5.70.56249.0%49-10.30.282-0.20.986+6.50.542-2.70.780-8.20.531-5.60.571-6.00.531-12.40.199
Half fence+4.60.623+10.30.28259.3%59+10.20.268+16.80.100+7.70.401+2.20.862+4.80.607+4.30.634-2.10.819
Breakable half fence-5.60.556+0.20.986-10.20.26849.1%59+6.70.515-2.50.784-8.00.529-5.40.565-5.80.523-12.20.185
Low fence-12.20.243-6.50.542-16.80.100-6.70.51542.5%40-9.20.369-14.60.277-12.10.246-12.50.221-18.90.066
Single wall-3.00.746+2.70.780-7.70.401+2.50.784+9.20.36951.7%60-5.50.665-2.90.757-3.30.714-9.70.288
Fence and open+2.40.850+8.20.531-2.20.862+8.00.529+14.60.277+5.50.66557.1%21+2.60.839+2.10.865-4.30.733
Open-0.20.986+5.60.571-4.80.607+5.40.565+12.10.246+2.90.757-2.60.83954.5%55-0.50.961-6.80.462
Rectangle+0.30.976+6.00.531-4.30.634+5.80.523+12.50.221+3.30.714-2.10.865+0.50.96155.0%60-6.40.483
Octagon+6.70.477+12.40.199+2.10.819+12.20.185+18.90.066+9.70.288+4.30.733+6.80.462+6.40.48361.4%57
Better on the row's stage — deeper at 5 and 10 pointsBetter on the column's stagep < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches on one side of the comparison

Matchups with two stages each played at least 80 times: 20. With a stage-against-stage difference that survives correction: 2. Expected from chance alone: about 1.0.

How significance is decided
  • Each gap is two win rates compared with a pooled two-proportion z test, over decided matches only.
  • The 95% interval is Newcombe's hybrid score method, which keeps its shape near 0% and 100% where a symmetric interval does not.
  • q is p corrected for how many tests were asked at once, by Benjamini–Hochberg at a 5% false discovery rate. A figure is called real on q, never on p alone.
  • Standard errors are widened by a measured design effect, because one player appears in many matches and those matches are not independent of each other.
  • Stages are assigned at random, so a gap between them is the stage's own effect and not a difference in who chose to play where.