VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Kage

Dural vs Kage in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 47.6% of 762 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 1 of 3 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted762
Win rate47.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-12.1 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
Octagon54.2%+6.50.24472 ·
Full fence54.0%+6.40.20587
Fence and open53.7%+6.10.29667 ·
Open48.0%+0.40.94775 ·
Breakable full fence46.3%-1.30.83854 ·
Low fence46.0%-1.60.77176 ·
Half fence45.7%-2.00.70981
Rectangle45.6%-2.00.72368 ·
Breakable half fence45.0%-2.60.67060 ·
Single wall35.6%-12.10.01590
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 9.41 on 9 df, p 0.400

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.0%87+7.70.372+8.30.280+9.00.282+8.00.310+18.50.013+0.30.971+6.00.444+8.40.297-0.10.986
Breakable full fence-7.70.37246.3%54+0.60.944+1.30.890+0.20.978+10.70.202-7.40.416-1.70.848+0.70.938-7.90.382
Half fence-8.30.280-0.60.94445.7%81+0.70.936-0.40.963+10.10.178-8.10.329-2.30.772+0.10.991-8.50.295
Breakable half fence-9.00.282-1.30.890-0.70.93645.0%60-1.10.903+9.40.246-8.70.326-3.00.728-0.60.947-9.20.294
Low fence-8.00.310-0.20.978+0.40.963+1.10.90346.0%76+10.50.170-7.70.359-1.90.811+0.50.955-8.10.324
Single wall-18.50.013-10.70.202-10.10.178-9.40.246-10.50.17035.6%90-18.20.023-12.40.106-10.00.202-18.60.018
Fence and open-0.30.971+7.40.416+8.10.329+8.70.326+7.70.359+18.20.02353.7%67+5.70.495+8.10.344-0.40.959
Open-6.00.444+1.70.848+2.30.772+3.00.728+1.90.811+12.40.106-5.70.49548.0%75+2.40.773-6.20.455
Rectangle-8.40.297-0.70.938-0.10.991+0.60.947-0.50.955+10.00.202-8.10.344-2.40.77345.6%68-8.60.310
Octagon+0.10.986+7.90.382+8.50.295+9.20.294+8.10.324+18.60.018+0.40.959+6.20.455+8.60.31054.2%72
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 counted220
Win rate55.0%
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
Open75.0%+20.00.09516 ·
Octagon73.3%+18.30.13915 ·
Breakable half fence66.7%+11.70.34715 ·
Full fence61.9%+6.90.50421 ·
Half fence59.3%+4.30.63527 ·
Fence and open56.0%+1.00.91525 ·
Single wall50.0%-5.00.58526 ·
Low fence46.1%-8.80.33426 ·
Breakable full fence45.5%-9.60.34322 ·
Rectangle18.8%-36.20.00216 ·
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 16.40 on 9 df, p 0.059

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence61.9%21+16.40.280+2.60.853-4.80.769+15.80.282+11.90.414+5.90.685-13.10.399+43.10.009-11.40.473
Breakable full fence-16.40.28045.5%22-13.80.336-21.20.204-0.70.961-4.50.753-10.60.471-29.60.069+26.70.087-27.90.093
Half fence-2.60.853+13.80.33659.3%27-7.40.636+13.10.339+9.30.498+3.30.812-15.70.295+40.50.010-14.10.362
Breakable half fence+4.80.769+21.20.204+7.40.63666.7%15+20.50.205+16.70.300+10.70.505-8.30.609+47.90.007-6.70.690
Low fence-15.80.282+0.70.961-13.10.339-20.50.20546.1%26-3.90.781-9.80.482-28.90.067+27.40.072-27.20.091
Single wall-11.90.414+4.50.753-9.30.498-16.70.300+3.90.78150.0%26-6.00.668-25.00.109+31.20.043-23.30.144
Fence and open-5.90.685+10.60.471-3.30.812-10.70.505+9.80.482+6.00.66856.0%25-19.00.218+37.20.018-17.30.273
Open+13.10.399+29.60.069+15.70.295+8.30.609+28.90.067+25.00.109+19.00.21875.0%16+56.20.001+1.70.916
Rectangle-43.10.009-26.70.087-40.50.010-47.90.007-27.40.072-31.20.043-37.20.018-56.20.00118.8%16-54.60.002
Octagon+11.40.473+27.90.093+14.10.362+6.70.690+27.20.091+23.30.144+17.30.273-1.70.916+54.60.00273.3%15
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 counted506
Win rate44.3%
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
Rectangle55.3%+11.10.10947 ·
Fence and open52.4%+8.10.26942 ·
Full fence51.6%+7.30.20964 ·
Octagon49.0%+4.80.47151 ·
Breakable full fence48.1%+3.90.67727 ·
Low fence44.9%+0.60.92649 ·
Half fence38.8%-5.50.41549 ·
Open38.2%-6.10.33655 ·
Breakable half fence36.4%-7.90.26944 ·
Single wall28.1%-16.20.00957 ·
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 14.07 on 9 df, p 0.120

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.6%64+3.40.766+12.80.177+15.20.119+6.70.482+23.50.009-0.80.934+13.40.144-3.80.695+2.50.786
Breakable full fence-3.40.76648.1%27+9.40.428+11.80.327+3.20.786+20.10.071-4.20.731+10.00.389-7.20.552-0.90.942
Half fence-12.80.177-9.40.42838.8%49+2.40.811-6.10.539+10.70.243-13.60.193+0.60.950-16.50.104-10.20.302
Breakable half fence-15.20.119-11.80.327-2.40.81136.4%44-8.50.403+8.30.374-16.00.135-1.80.853-19.00.070-12.70.214
Low fence-6.70.482-3.20.786+6.10.539+8.50.40344.9%49+16.80.072-7.50.476+6.70.488-10.40.307-4.10.680
Single wall-23.50.009-20.10.071-10.70.243-8.30.374-16.80.07228.1%57-24.30.014-10.10.255-27.20.005-20.90.025
Fence and open+0.80.934+4.20.731+13.60.193+16.00.135+7.50.476+24.30.01452.4%42+14.20.163-2.90.781+3.40.747
Open-13.40.144-10.00.389-0.60.950+1.80.853-6.70.488+10.10.255-14.20.16338.2%55-17.10.083-10.80.261
Rectangle+3.80.695+7.20.552+16.50.104+19.00.070+10.40.307+27.20.005+2.90.781+17.10.08355.3%47+6.30.533
Octagon-2.50.786+0.90.942+10.20.302+12.70.214+4.10.680+20.90.025-3.40.747+10.80.261-6.30.53349.0%51
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 counted36
Win rate50.0%
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 fence100.0%+50.00.3101 ·
Low fence100.0%+50.00.3101 ·
Open75.0%+25.00.2894 ·
Full fence50.0%+0.01.0002 ·
Octagon50.0%+0.01.0006 ·
Single wall42.9%-7.10.6747 ·
Breakable full fence40.0%-10.00.6305 ·
Half fence40.0%-10.00.6305 ·
Rectangle40.0%-10.00.6305 ·
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 3.74 on 8 df, p 0.880

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%2+10.00.809+10.00.809-50.00.386-50.00.386+7.10.858-25.00.540+10.00.809+0.01.000
Breakable full fence-10.00.80940.0%5+0.01.000-60.00.273-60.00.273-2.90.921-35.00.294+0.01.000-10.00.740
Half fence-10.00.809-0.01.00040.0%5-60.00.273-60.00.273-2.90.921-35.00.294+0.01.000-10.00.740
Breakable half fence+50.00.386+60.00.273+60.00.273100.0%1+0.01.000+57.10.285+25.00.576+60.00.273+50.00.350
Low fence+50.00.386+60.00.273+60.00.273-0.01.000100.0%1+57.10.285+25.00.576+60.00.273+50.00.350
Single wall-7.10.858+2.90.921+2.90.921-57.10.285-57.10.28542.9%7-32.10.303+2.90.921-7.10.797
Open+25.00.540+35.00.294+35.00.294-25.00.576-25.00.576+32.10.30375.0%4+35.00.294+25.00.429
Rectangle-10.00.809-0.01.000-0.01.000-60.00.273-60.00.273-2.90.921-35.00.29440.0%5-10.00.740
Octagon-0.01.000+10.00.740+10.00.740-50.00.350-50.00.350+7.10.797-25.00.429+10.00.74050.0%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.