VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Jacky

Dural vs Jacky in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 51.3% of 1,354 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 1 of 9 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted1,354
Win rate51.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-11.6 pts
Survive correction1
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
Single wall58.3%+7.00.097127
Half fence55.1%+3.80.323147
Open53.7%+2.40.576123
Rectangle52.0%+0.70.866127
Fence and open51.5%+0.30.96566 ·
Octagon50.7%-0.60.890142
Breakable full fence50.6%-0.70.860164
Breakable half fence50.0%-1.30.769124
Low fence50.0%-1.30.763130
Full fence39.7%-11.60.004136
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 11.13 on 9 df, p 0.267

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence39.7%136-10.90.059-15.40.010-10.30.095-10.30.091-18.60.003-11.80.112-13.90.025-12.30.046-11.00.066
Breakable full fence+10.90.05950.6%164-4.50.428+0.60.918+0.60.917-7.70.194-0.90.901-3.00.609-1.40.818-0.10.987
Half fence+15.40.010+4.50.42855.1%147+5.10.402+5.10.396-3.20.598+3.60.627+1.40.813+3.10.604+4.40.454
Breakable half fence+10.30.095-0.60.918-5.10.40250.0%124+0.01.000-8.30.189-1.50.842-3.70.565-2.00.755-0.70.909
Low fence+10.30.091-0.60.917-5.10.396-0.01.00050.0%130-8.30.184-1.50.841-3.70.561-2.00.752-0.70.908
Single wall+18.60.003+7.70.194+3.20.598+8.30.189+8.30.18458.3%127+6.80.370+4.60.463+6.30.313+7.60.214
Fence and open+11.80.112+0.90.901-3.60.627+1.50.842+1.50.841-6.80.37051.5%66-2.10.778-0.50.952+0.80.913
Open+13.90.025+3.00.609-1.40.813+3.70.565+3.70.561-4.60.463+2.10.77853.7%123+1.70.789+3.00.631
Rectangle+12.30.046+1.40.818-3.10.604+2.00.755+2.00.752-6.30.313+0.50.952-1.70.78952.0%127+1.30.836
Octagon+11.00.066+0.10.987-4.40.454+0.70.909+0.70.908-7.60.214-0.80.913-3.00.631-1.30.83650.7%142
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 counted496
Win rate51.8%
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
Open60.5%+8.70.23543 ·
Half fence59.2%+7.40.27749 ·
Single wall59.2%+7.40.27749 ·
Rectangle56.2%+4.40.51848 ·
Breakable full fence50.8%-1.10.85167 ·
Breakable half fence49.0%-2.80.67649 ·
Low fence46.0%-5.90.45837 ·
Fence and open45.5%-6.40.44933 ·
Octagon44.4%-7.40.29945 ·
Full fence41.4%-10.40.09158 ·
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 8.47 on 9 df, p 0.487

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence41.4%58-9.40.295-17.80.066-7.60.431-4.60.661-17.80.066-4.10.706-19.10.058-14.90.127-3.10.755
Breakable full fence+9.40.29550.8%67-8.40.368+1.80.851+4.80.639-8.40.368+5.30.619-9.70.318-5.50.560+6.30.513
Half fence+17.80.066+8.40.36859.2%49+10.20.311+13.20.223+0.01.000+13.70.221-1.30.900+2.90.770+14.70.153
Breakable half fence+7.60.431-1.80.851-10.20.31149.0%49+3.00.780-10.20.311+3.50.754-11.50.270-7.30.473+4.50.660
Low fence+4.60.661-4.80.639-13.20.223-3.00.78046.0%37-13.20.223+0.50.967-14.50.194-10.30.346+1.50.892
Single wall+17.80.066+8.40.368-0.01.000+10.20.311+13.20.22359.2%49+13.70.221-1.30.900+2.90.770+14.70.153
Fence and open+4.10.706-5.30.619-13.70.221-3.50.754-0.50.967-13.70.22145.5%33-15.00.193-10.80.339+1.00.929
Open+19.10.058+9.70.318+1.30.900+11.50.270+14.50.194+1.30.900+15.00.19360.5%43+4.20.684+16.00.133
Rectangle+14.90.127+5.50.560-2.90.770+7.30.473+10.30.346-2.90.770+10.80.339-4.20.68456.2%48+11.80.255
Octagon+3.10.755-6.30.513-14.70.153-4.50.660-1.50.892-14.70.153-1.00.929-16.00.133-11.80.25544.4%45
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 counted805
Win rate51.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches2.5 pts
Survive correction0
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
Single wall59.7%+8.40.15167 ·
Fence and open57.6%+6.30.46233 ·
Octagon53.9%+2.50.60691
Half fence53.7%+2.40.62195
Breakable half fence53.5%+2.20.69671 ·
Low fence51.7%+0.40.93989
Breakable full fence50.5%-0.80.86897
Open50.0%-1.30.80878 ·
Rectangle47.1%-4.20.46468 ·
Full fence37.5%-13.80.01472 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 9.06 on 9 df, p 0.431

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence37.5%72-13.00.093-16.20.038-16.00.054-14.20.072-22.20.009-20.10.054-12.50.123-9.60.252-16.40.038
Breakable full fence+13.00.09350.5%97-3.20.660-3.00.700-1.20.873-9.20.246-7.10.483+0.50.946+3.50.662-3.30.648
Half fence+16.20.038+3.20.66053.7%95+0.20.983+2.00.786-6.00.447-3.90.699+3.70.629+6.60.404-0.20.982
Breakable half fence+16.00.054+3.00.700-0.20.98353.5%71+1.80.817-6.20.464-4.10.699+3.50.668+6.50.446-0.30.967
Low fence+14.20.072+1.20.873-2.00.786-1.80.81751.7%89-8.00.319-5.90.562+1.70.828+4.60.566-2.20.772
Single wall+22.20.009+9.20.246+6.00.447+6.20.464+8.00.31959.7%67+2.10.839+9.70.242+12.60.141+5.80.463
Fence and open+20.10.054+7.10.483+3.90.699+4.10.699+5.90.562-2.10.83957.6%33+7.60.465+10.50.321+3.70.712
Open+12.50.123-0.50.946-3.70.629-3.50.668-1.70.828-9.70.242-7.60.46550.0%78+2.90.723-3.90.618
Rectangle+9.60.252-3.50.662-6.60.404-6.50.446-4.60.566-12.60.141-10.50.321-2.90.72347.1%68-6.80.397
Octagon+16.40.038+3.30.648+0.20.982+0.30.967+2.20.772-5.80.463-3.70.712+3.90.618+6.80.39753.9%91
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 counted53
Win rate45.3%
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
Rectangle63.6%+18.40.17011 ·
Full fence50.0%+4.70.8056 ·
Low fence50.0%+4.70.8444 ·
Octagon50.0%+4.70.8056 ·
Open50.0%+4.70.8912 ·
Single wall45.5%+0.20.99011 ·
Half fence33.3%-11.90.6693 ·
Breakable half fence0.0%-45.30.0584 ·
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 5.07 on 7 df, p 0.651

StageFullHalfBreak. halfLowWallOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%6+16.70.635+50.00.091+0.01.000+4.50.858+0.01.000-13.60.585+0.01.000
Half fence-16.70.63533.3%3+33.30.212-16.70.659-12.10.707-16.70.709-30.30.347-16.70.635
Breakable half fence-50.00.091-33.30.2120.0%4-50.00.102-45.50.099-50.00.121-63.60.029-50.00.091
Low fence-0.01.000+16.70.659+50.00.10250.0%4+4.50.876+0.01.000-13.60.634+0.01.000
Single wall-4.50.858+12.10.707+45.50.099-4.50.87645.5%11-4.50.906-18.20.392-4.50.858
Open-0.01.000+16.70.709+50.00.121-0.01.000+4.50.90650.0%2-13.60.715+0.01.000
Rectangle+13.60.585+30.30.347+63.60.029+13.60.634+18.20.392+13.60.71563.6%11+13.60.585
Octagon-0.01.000+16.70.635+50.00.091-0.01.000+4.50.858-0.01.000-13.60.58550.0%6
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.