Virtua Fighter 5 REVO · v1.10 · Character Matchup Winrates
Brad vs Wolf
Matches counted2,300
Win rate52.7%
Widest swing7.1 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Brad's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Octagon | 59.8% | +7.1 | 0.016 | 254 | |
| Breakable half fence | 55.6% | +2.9 | 0.351 | 230 | |
| Single wall | 55.2% | +2.4 | 0.447 | 223 | |
| Rectangle | 55.1% | +2.4 | 0.414 | 265 | |
| Half fence | 54.5% | +1.8 | 0.569 | 233 | |
| Low fence | 53.8% | +1.0 | 0.770 | 186 | |
| Breakable full fence | 49.3% | -3.5 | 0.294 | 209 | |
| Fence and open | 49.1% | -3.6 | 0.428 | 114 | |
| Full fence | 48.7% | -4.1 | 0.160 | 263 | |
| Open | 46.6% | -6.2 | 0.064 | 204 |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Brad's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 13.77 on 9 df, p 0.131
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 48.7%263 | -0.60.895 | -5.80.194 | -7.00.122 | -5.10.288 | -6.50.154 | -0.50.936 | +2.10.652 | -6.40.140 | -11.20.011 |
| Breakable full fence | +0.60.895 | 49.3%209 | -5.20.272 | -6.40.182 | -4.50.374 | -5.90.222 | +0.20.978 | +2.70.581 | -5.80.208 | -10.60.023 |
| Half fence | +5.80.194 | +5.20.272 | 54.5%233 | -1.10.804 | +0.80.879 | -0.70.889 | +5.40.345 | +7.90.098 | -0.60.895 | -5.30.234 |
| Breakable half fence | +7.00.122 | +6.40.182 | +1.10.804 | 55.6%230 | +1.90.700 | +0.50.916 | +6.50.253 | +9.10.059 | +0.60.901 | -4.20.351 |
| Low fence | +5.10.288 | +4.50.374 | -0.80.879 | -1.90.700 | 53.8%186 | -1.40.778 | +4.60.435 | +7.20.156 | -1.30.780 | -6.10.203 |
| Single wall | +6.50.154 | +5.90.222 | +0.70.889 | -0.50.916 | +1.40.778 | 55.2%223 | +6.00.294 | +8.60.076 | +0.10.989 | -4.70.301 |
| Fence and open | +0.50.936 | -0.20.978 | -5.40.345 | -6.50.253 | -4.60.435 | -6.00.294 | 49.1%114 | +2.50.662 | -6.00.285 | -10.70.055 |
| Open | -2.10.652 | -2.70.581 | -7.90.098 | -9.10.059 | -7.20.156 | -8.60.076 | -2.50.662 | 46.6%204 | -8.50.067 | -13.30.005 |
| Rectangle | +6.40.140 | +5.80.208 | +0.60.895 | -0.60.901 | +1.30.780 | -0.10.989 | +6.00.285 | +8.50.067 | 55.1%265 | -4.80.274 |
| Octagon | +11.20.011 | +10.60.023 | +5.30.234 | +4.20.351 | +6.10.203 | +4.70.301 | +10.70.055 | +13.30.005 | +4.80.274 | 59.8%254 |
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
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.
Matches counted1,998
Win rate52.8%
Widest swing-7.1 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Brad's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Octagon | 59.2% | +6.4 | 0.043 | 223 | |
| Single wall | 56.9% | +4.1 | 0.225 | 195 | |
| Rectangle | 56.4% | +3.6 | 0.250 | 227 | |
| Breakable half fence | 55.1% | +2.3 | 0.490 | 207 | |
| Low fence | 54.2% | +1.4 | 0.718 | 155 | |
| Half fence | 53.8% | +1.0 | 0.766 | 197 | |
| Breakable full fence | 49.7% | -3.1 | 0.379 | 185 | |
| Fence and open | 49.0% | -3.8 | 0.437 | 98 | |
| Full fence | 47.9% | -4.9 | 0.107 | 234 | |
| Open | 45.7% | -7.1 | 0.049 | 175 |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Brad's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 13.81 on 9 df, p 0.129
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 47.9%234 | -1.90.704 | -6.00.219 | -7.20.131 | -6.30.222 | -9.10.061 | -1.10.853 | +2.10.667 | -8.50.067 | -11.30.015 |
| Breakable full fence | +1.90.704 | 49.7%185 | -4.10.425 | -5.30.290 | -4.50.412 | -7.20.160 | +0.80.904 | +4.00.446 | -6.70.178 | -9.50.056 |
| Half fence | +6.00.219 | +4.10.425 | 53.8%197 | -1.30.799 | -0.40.942 | -3.10.535 | +4.80.434 | +8.10.119 | -2.60.594 | -5.40.266 |
| Breakable half fence | +7.20.131 | +5.30.290 | +1.30.799 | 55.1%207 | +0.90.868 | -1.90.709 | +6.10.319 | +9.40.068 | -1.30.783 | -4.10.388 |
| Low fence | +6.30.222 | +4.50.412 | +0.40.942 | -0.90.868 | 54.2%155 | -2.70.610 | +5.20.419 | +8.50.124 | -2.20.672 | -5.00.334 |
| Single wall | +9.10.061 | +7.20.160 | +3.10.535 | +1.90.709 | +2.70.610 | 56.9%195 | +7.90.198 | +11.20.031 | +0.50.912 | -2.30.639 |
| Fence and open | +1.10.853 | -0.80.904 | -4.80.434 | -6.10.319 | -5.20.419 | -7.90.198 | 49.0%98 | +3.30.604 | -7.40.219 | -10.20.090 |
| Open | -2.10.667 | -4.00.446 | -8.10.119 | -9.40.068 | -8.50.124 | -11.20.031 | -3.30.604 | 45.7%175 | -10.70.034 | -13.50.007 |
| Rectangle | +8.50.067 | +6.70.178 | +2.60.594 | +1.30.783 | +2.20.672 | -0.50.912 | +7.40.219 | +10.70.034 | 56.4%227 | -2.80.547 |
| Octagon | +11.30.015 | +9.50.056 | +5.40.266 | +4.10.388 | +5.00.334 | +2.30.639 | +10.20.090 | +13.50.007 | +2.80.547 | 59.2%223 |
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
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.
Matches counted302
Win rate52.3%
Widest swing12.2 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Brad's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Octagon | 64.5% | +12.2 | 0.151 | 31 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 60.9% | +8.6 | 0.393 | 23 · | |
| Half fence | 58.3% | +6.0 | 0.441 | 36 · | |
| Full fence | 55.2% | +2.9 | 0.746 | 29 · | |
| Open | 51.7% | -0.6 | 0.946 | 29 · | |
| Low fence | 51.6% | -0.7 | 0.934 | 31 · | |
| Fence and open | 50.0% | -2.3 | 0.849 | 16 · | |
| Rectangle | 47.4% | -5.0 | 0.514 | 38 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 45.8% | -6.5 | 0.507 | 24 · | |
| Single wall | 42.9% | -9.5 | 0.293 | 28 · |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Brad's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 4.92 on 9 df, p 0.841
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 55.2%29 | +9.30.498 | -3.20.798 | -5.70.680 | +3.60.782 | +12.30.352 | +5.20.739 | +3.50.792 | +7.80.527 | -9.30.460 |
| Breakable full fence | -9.30.498 | 45.8%24 | -12.50.342 | -15.00.302 | -5.80.671 | +3.00.829 | -4.20.796 | -5.90.669 | -1.50.906 | -18.70.166 |
| Half fence | +3.20.798 | +12.50.342 | 58.3%36 | -2.50.847 | +6.70.581 | +15.50.219 | +8.30.577 | +6.60.594 | +11.00.345 | -6.20.605 |
| Breakable half fence | +5.70.680 | +15.00.302 | +2.50.847 | 60.9%23 | +9.30.498 | +18.00.200 | +10.90.501 | +9.20.510 | +13.50.306 | -3.60.784 |
| Low fence | -3.60.782 | +5.80.671 | -6.70.581 | -9.30.498 | 51.6%31 | +8.80.501 | +1.60.917 | -0.10.993 | +4.20.726 | -12.90.303 |
| Single wall | -12.30.352 | -3.00.829 | -15.50.219 | -18.00.200 | -8.80.501 | 42.9%28 | -7.10.647 | -8.90.503 | -4.50.716 | -21.70.095 |
| Fence and open | -5.20.739 | +4.20.796 | -8.30.577 | -10.90.501 | -1.60.917 | +7.10.647 | 50.0%16 | -1.70.912 | +2.60.860 | -14.50.337 |
| Open | -3.50.792 | +5.90.669 | -6.60.594 | -9.20.510 | +0.10.993 | +8.90.503 | +1.70.912 | 51.7%29 | +4.30.724 | -12.80.315 |
| Rectangle | -7.80.527 | +1.50.906 | -11.00.345 | -13.50.306 | -4.20.726 | +4.50.716 | -2.60.860 | -4.30.724 | 47.4%38 | -17.10.154 |
| Octagon | +9.30.460 | +18.70.166 | +6.20.605 | +3.60.784 | +12.90.303 | +21.70.095 | +14.50.337 | +12.80.315 | +17.10.154 | 64.5%31 |
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
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.