VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Lau

Dural vs Lau in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 52.7% of 656 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 counted656
Win rate52.7%
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
Rectangle59.2%+6.50.23076 ·
Breakable half fence59.1%+6.30.27666 ·
Low fence57.9%+5.20.41557 ·
Single wall57.6%+4.90.43159 ·
Open56.9%+4.10.54051 ·
Half fence50.0%-2.70.62172 ·
Full fence49.2%-3.50.55065 ·
Breakable full fence48.7%-4.00.44878 ·
Fence and open47.5%-5.20.49340 ·
Octagon43.6%-9.10.15855 ·
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 7.14 on 9 df, p 0.622

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.2%65+0.50.951-0.80.928-9.90.257-8.70.339-8.40.349+1.70.863-7.60.414-10.00.235+5.60.540
Breakable full fence-0.50.95148.7%78-1.30.875-10.40.214-9.20.292-8.90.301+1.20.900-8.10.365-10.50.192+5.10.563
Half fence+0.80.928+1.30.87550.0%72-9.10.284-7.90.372-7.60.384+2.50.800-6.90.453-9.20.261+6.40.477
Breakable half fence+9.90.257+10.40.214+9.10.28459.1%66+1.20.893+1.50.868+11.60.245+2.20.809-0.10.988+15.40.090
Low fence+8.70.339+9.20.292+7.90.372-1.20.89357.9%57+0.30.977+10.40.312+1.00.914-1.30.879+14.20.131
Single wall+8.40.349+8.90.301+7.60.384-1.50.868-0.30.97757.6%59+10.10.321+0.80.936-1.60.853+14.00.135
Fence and open-1.70.863-1.20.900-2.50.800-11.60.245-10.40.312-10.10.32147.5%40-9.40.375-11.70.228+3.90.709
Open+7.60.414+8.10.365+6.90.453-2.20.809-1.00.914-0.80.936+9.40.37556.9%51-2.40.793+13.20.174
Rectangle+10.00.235+10.50.192+9.20.261+0.10.988+1.30.879+1.60.853+11.70.228+2.40.79359.2%76+15.60.078
Octagon-5.60.540-5.10.563-6.40.477-15.40.090-14.20.131-14.00.135-3.90.709-13.20.174-15.60.07843.6%55
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 counted268
Win rate53.0%
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
Single wall65.7%+12.70.10635 ·
Breakable half fence65.4%+12.40.18326 ·
Open59.1%+6.10.54922 ·
Breakable full fence52.9%-0.10.99634 ·
Half fence51.7%-1.30.88529 ·
Full fence50.0%-3.00.78120 ·
Low fence50.0%-3.00.78120 ·
Rectangle50.0%-3.00.73828 ·
Octagon41.4%-11.60.18529 ·
Fence and open37.5%-15.50.20116 ·
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 7.58 on 9 df, p 0.577

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%20-2.90.835-1.70.906-15.40.293+0.01.000-15.70.252+12.50.453-9.10.554+0.01.000+8.60.551
Breakable full fence+2.90.83552.9%34+1.20.923-12.40.333+2.90.835-12.80.280+15.40.308-6.20.651+2.90.818+11.60.360
Half fence+1.70.906-1.20.92351.7%29-13.70.305+1.70.906-14.00.257+14.20.360-7.40.601+1.70.896+10.30.430
Breakable half fence+15.40.293+12.40.333+13.70.30565.4%26+15.40.293-0.30.979+27.90.078+6.30.654+15.40.253+24.00.075
Low fence-0.01.000-2.90.835-1.70.906-15.40.29350.0%20-15.70.252+12.50.453-9.10.554+0.01.000+8.60.551
Single wall+15.70.252+12.80.280+14.00.257+0.30.979+15.70.25265.7%35+28.20.059+6.60.614+15.70.208+24.30.052
Fence and open-12.50.453-15.40.308-14.20.360-27.90.078-12.50.453-28.20.05937.5%16-21.60.189-12.50.423-3.90.799
Open+9.10.554+6.20.651+7.40.601-6.30.654+9.10.554-6.60.614+21.60.18959.1%22+9.10.522+17.70.210
Rectangle-0.01.000-2.90.818-1.70.896-15.40.253-0.01.000-15.70.208+12.50.423-9.10.52250.0%28+8.60.514
Octagon-8.60.551-11.60.360-10.30.430-24.00.075-8.60.551-24.30.052+3.90.799-17.70.210-8.60.51441.4%29
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 counted342
Win rate51.2%
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
Low fence60.6%+9.40.25433 ·
Rectangle58.3%+7.20.36336 ·
Open57.7%+6.50.48926 ·
Fence and open56.5%+5.30.59523 ·
Breakable half fence53.9%+2.70.72239 ·
Breakable full fence46.1%-5.00.50639 ·
Full fence46.1%-5.00.50639 ·
Half fence46.0%-5.20.50137 ·
Single wall45.5%-5.70.57922 ·
Octagon44.0%-7.20.45625 ·
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 4.72 on 9 df, p 0.858

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.1%39+0.01.000+0.20.985-7.70.497-14.50.221+0.70.958-10.40.430-11.50.362-12.20.292+2.10.866
Breakable full fence-0.01.00046.1%39+0.20.985-7.70.497-14.50.221+0.70.958-10.40.430-11.50.362-12.20.292+2.10.866
Half fence-0.20.985-0.20.98546.0%37-7.90.491-14.70.220+0.50.971-10.60.426-11.70.359-12.40.290+1.90.880
Breakable half fence+7.70.497+7.70.497+7.90.49153.9%39-6.80.564+8.40.529-2.70.838-3.80.760-4.50.696+9.80.442
Low fence+14.50.221+14.50.221+14.70.220+6.80.56460.6%33+15.20.269+4.10.760+2.90.821+2.30.848+16.60.209
Single wall-0.70.958-0.70.958-0.50.971-8.40.529-15.20.26945.5%22-11.10.458-12.20.398-12.90.340+1.40.920
Fence and open+10.40.430+10.40.430+10.60.426+2.70.838-4.10.760+11.10.45856.5%23-1.20.934-1.80.891+12.50.386
Open+11.50.362+11.50.362+11.70.359+3.80.760-2.90.821+12.20.398+1.20.93457.7%26-0.60.960+13.70.328
Rectangle+12.20.292+12.20.292+12.40.290+4.50.696-2.30.848+12.90.340+1.80.891+0.60.96058.3%36+14.30.270
Octagon-2.10.866-2.10.866-1.90.880-9.80.442-16.60.209-1.40.920-12.50.386-13.70.328-14.30.27044.0%25
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 counted46
Win rate63.0%
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%+37.00.4391 ·
Octagon100.0%+37.00.4391 ·
Rectangle83.3%+20.30.09012 ·
Low fence75.0%+12.00.6044 ·
Full fence66.7%+3.60.8446 ·
Half fence66.7%+3.60.8446 ·
Single wall50.0%-13.00.6962 ·
Breakable full fence40.0%-23.00.2585 ·
Open33.3%-29.70.2703 ·
Fence and open0.0%-63.00.1871 ·
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 7.87 on 9 df, p 0.547

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence66.7%6+26.70.376+0.01.000-33.30.495-8.30.778+16.70.673+66.70.212+33.30.343-16.70.423-33.30.495
Breakable full fence-26.70.37640.0%5-26.70.376-60.00.273-35.00.294-10.00.809+40.00.439+6.70.850-43.30.074-60.00.273
Half fence-0.01.000+26.70.37666.7%6-33.30.495-8.30.778+16.70.673+66.70.212+33.30.343-16.70.423-33.30.495
Breakable half fence+33.30.495+60.00.273+33.30.495100.0%1+25.00.576+50.00.386+100.00.157+66.70.248+16.70.657+0.01.000
Low fence+8.30.778+35.00.294+8.30.778-25.00.57675.0%4+25.00.540+75.00.171+41.70.270-8.30.712-25.00.576
Single wall-16.70.673+10.00.809-16.70.673-50.00.386-25.00.54050.0%2+50.00.386+16.70.709-33.30.287-50.00.386
Fence and open-66.70.212-40.00.439-66.70.212-100.00.157-75.00.171-50.00.3860.0%1-33.30.505-83.30.057-100.00.157
Open-33.30.343-6.70.850-33.30.343-66.70.248-41.70.270-16.70.709+33.30.50533.3%3-50.00.080-66.70.248
Rectangle+16.70.423+43.30.074+16.70.423-16.70.657+8.30.712+33.30.287+83.30.057+50.00.08083.3%12-16.70.657
Octagon+33.30.495+60.00.273+33.30.495-0.01.000+25.00.576+50.00.386+100.00.157+66.70.248+16.70.657100.0%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.