VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Eileen

Dural vs Eileen in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 57.1% of 275 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18), with win rates on every stage type.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted275
Win rate57.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Dural's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Rectangle78.6%+21.50.09614 ·
Half fence71.4%+14.30.16721 ·
Octagon70.8%+13.70.15524 ·
Low fence65.8%+8.80.21941 ·
Breakable half fence61.5%+4.50.63026 ·
Full fence54.8%-2.20.78831 ·
Single wall52.6%-4.50.68419 ·
Fence and open48.0%-9.10.33525 ·
Open42.4%-14.70.07033 ·
Breakable full fence39.3%-17.80.04528 ·
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: 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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 15.34 on 9 df, p 0.082

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.8%31+15.60.232-16.60.228-6.70.610-11.00.342+2.20.879+6.80.611+12.40.321-23.70.128-16.00.226
Breakable full fence-15.60.23239.3%28-32.10.026-22.20.102-26.60.029-13.30.366-8.70.523-3.10.804-39.30.016-31.50.023
Half fence+16.60.228+32.10.02671.4%21+9.90.477+5.60.657+18.80.220+23.40.108+29.00.037-7.10.636+0.60.965
Breakable half fence+6.70.610+22.20.102-9.90.47761.5%26-4.30.720+8.90.550+13.50.331+19.10.145-17.00.273-9.30.488
Low fence+11.00.342+26.60.029-5.60.657+4.30.72065.8%41+13.20.327+17.90.152+23.40.044-12.70.374-5.00.679
Single wall-2.20.879+13.30.366-18.80.220-8.90.550-13.20.32752.6%19+4.60.761+10.20.477-25.90.126-18.20.220
Fence and open-6.80.611+8.70.523-23.40.108-13.50.331-17.90.152-4.60.76148.0%25+5.60.672-30.60.063-22.80.104
Open-12.40.321+3.10.804-29.00.037-19.10.145-23.40.044-10.20.477-5.60.67242.4%33-36.10.023-28.40.033
Rectangle+23.70.128+39.30.016+7.10.636+17.00.273+12.70.374+25.90.126+30.60.063+36.10.02378.6%14+7.70.601
Octagon+16.00.226+31.50.023-0.60.965+9.30.488+5.00.679+18.20.220+22.80.104+28.40.033-7.70.60170.8%24
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 counted130
Win rate61.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Dural's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Rectangle100.0%+38.50.0327 ·
Low fence86.7%+25.10.03315 ·
Half fence83.3%+21.80.2616 ·
Octagon81.8%+20.30.14811 ·
Breakable half fence58.3%-3.20.81112 ·
Fence and open54.5%-7.00.61811 ·
Breakable full fence53.9%-7.70.54813 ·
Single wall50.0%-11.50.34814 ·
Full fence46.7%-14.90.20815 ·
Open38.9%-22.60.03318 ·
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: 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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 18.18 on 9 df, p 0.033

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.7%15-7.20.705-36.70.125-11.70.547-40.00.020-3.30.858-7.90.691+7.80.653-53.30.015-35.10.069
Breakable full fence+7.20.70553.9%13-29.50.216-4.50.821-32.80.055+3.90.842-0.70.973+15.00.409-46.10.032-28.00.148
Half fence+36.70.125+29.50.21683.3%6+25.00.289-3.30.844+33.30.163+28.80.235+44.40.059-16.70.261+1.50.938
Breakable half fence+11.70.547+4.50.821-25.00.28958.3%12-28.30.095+8.30.671+3.80.855+19.40.296-41.70.047-23.50.221
Low fence+40.00.020+32.80.055+3.30.844+28.30.09586.7%15+36.70.033+32.10.068+47.80.005-13.30.311+4.80.735
Single wall+3.30.858-3.90.842-33.30.163-8.30.671-36.70.03350.0%14-4.50.821+11.10.530-50.00.022-31.80.100
Fence and open+7.90.691+0.70.973-28.80.235-3.80.855-32.10.068+4.50.82154.5%11+15.70.411-45.50.036-27.30.170
Open-7.80.653-15.00.409-44.40.059-19.40.296-47.80.005-11.10.530-15.70.41138.9%18-61.10.006-42.90.024
Rectangle+53.30.015+46.10.032+16.70.261+41.70.047+13.30.311+50.00.022+45.50.036+61.10.006100.0%7+18.20.231
Octagon+35.10.069+28.00.148-1.50.938+23.50.221-4.80.735+31.80.100+27.30.170+42.90.024-18.20.23181.8%11
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 counted127
Win rate52.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Dural's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Full fence66.7%+13.90.31012 ·
Half fence66.7%+13.90.25015 ·
Rectangle66.7%+13.90.4846 ·
Octagon61.5%+8.80.50313 ·
Single wall60.0%+7.20.7415 ·
Breakable half fence55.6%+2.80.8619 ·
Low fence50.0%-2.80.77622 ·
Open50.0%-2.80.82714 ·
Fence and open46.1%-6.60.61513 ·
Breakable full fence26.7%-26.10.03115 ·
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: 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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 7.53 on 9 df, p 0.582

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence66.7%12+40.00.038+0.01.000+11.10.604+16.70.350+6.70.793+20.50.302+16.70.391+0.01.000+5.10.790
Breakable full fence-40.00.03826.7%15-40.00.028-28.90.157-23.30.156-33.30.176-19.50.283-23.30.196-40.00.088-34.90.063
Half fence-0.01.000+40.00.02866.7%15+11.10.586+16.70.315+6.70.787+20.50.274+16.70.362+0.01.000+5.10.778
Breakable half fence-11.10.604+28.90.157-11.10.58655.6%9+5.60.779-4.40.872+9.40.665+5.60.795-11.10.667-6.00.779
Low fence-16.70.350+23.30.156-16.70.315-5.60.77950.0%22-10.00.686+3.90.826+0.01.000-16.70.468-11.50.508
Single wall-6.70.793+33.30.176-6.70.787+4.40.872+10.00.68660.0%5+13.80.599+10.00.701-6.70.819-1.50.952
Fence and open-20.50.302+19.50.283-20.50.274-9.40.665-3.90.826-13.80.59946.1%13-3.90.842-20.50.405-15.40.431
Open-16.70.391+23.30.196-16.70.362-5.60.795-0.01.000-10.00.701+3.90.84250.0%14-16.70.492-11.50.547
Rectangle-0.01.000+40.00.088-0.01.000+11.10.667+16.70.468+6.70.819+20.50.405+16.70.49266.7%6+5.10.829
Octagon-5.10.790+34.90.063-5.10.778+6.00.779+11.50.508+1.50.952+15.40.431+11.50.547-5.10.82961.5%13
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 counted18
Win rate55.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Dural's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable half fence80.0%+24.40.1965 ·
Low fence75.0%+19.40.3754 ·
Full fence50.0%-5.60.8004 ·
Fence and open0.0%-55.60.2501 ·
Open0.0%-55.60.2501 ·
Rectangle0.0%-55.60.2501 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 5.64 on 5 df, p 0.343

StageFullBreak. halfLowMixedOpenRect
Full fence50.0%4-30.00.343-25.00.465+50.00.361+50.00.361+50.00.361
Breakable half fence+30.00.34380.0%5+5.00.858+80.00.121+80.00.121+80.00.121
Low fence+25.00.465-5.00.85875.0%4+75.00.171+75.00.171+75.00.171
Fence and open-50.00.361-80.00.121-75.00.1710.0%1+0.01.000+0.01.000
Open-50.00.361-80.00.121-75.00.171-0.01.0000.0%1+0.01.000
Rectangle-50.00.361-80.00.121-75.00.171-0.01.000-0.01.0000.0%1
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.