VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Lei Fei

Dural vs Lei Fei in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 60.0% of 463 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 counted463
Win rate60.0%
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
Low fence76.9%+16.90.07026 ·
Breakable full fence72.7%+12.70.07144 ·
Half fence68.6%+8.60.18551 ·
Open62.2%+2.10.78437 ·
Single wall59.6%-0.40.94752 ·
Octagon59.5%-0.50.94342 ·
Breakable half fence57.9%-2.10.72457 ·
Rectangle54.7%-5.30.40053 ·
Full fence50.9%-9.10.14155 ·
Fence and open32.0%-28.00.00325 ·
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 18.46 on 9 df, p 0.030

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.9%55-21.80.027-17.70.063-7.00.458-26.00.026-8.70.365+18.90.115-11.20.287-3.80.692-8.60.398
Breakable full fence+21.80.02772.7%44+4.10.662+14.80.123-4.20.698+13.10.178+40.7<0.001+10.60.310+18.00.068+13.20.195
Half fence+17.70.063-4.10.66268.6%51+10.70.249-8.30.446+9.00.341+36.60.002+6.50.528+13.90.145+9.10.361
Breakable half fence+7.00.458-14.80.123-10.70.24957.9%57-19.00.094-1.70.855+25.90.031-4.30.680+3.20.737-1.60.871
Low fence+26.00.026+4.20.698+8.30.446+19.00.09476.9%26+17.30.130+44.90.001+14.80.215+22.20.056+17.40.141
Single wall+8.70.365-13.10.178-9.00.341+1.70.855-17.30.13059.6%52+27.60.023-2.50.808+4.90.612+0.10.993
Fence and open-18.90.115-40.7<0.001-36.60.002-25.90.031-44.90.001-27.60.02332.0%25-30.20.020-22.70.061-27.50.029
Open+11.20.287-10.60.310-6.50.528+4.30.680-14.80.215+2.50.808+30.20.02062.2%37+7.40.482+2.60.811
Rectangle+3.80.692-18.00.068-13.90.145-3.20.737-22.20.056-4.90.612+22.70.061-7.40.48254.7%53-4.80.639
Octagon+8.60.398-13.20.195-9.10.361+1.60.871-17.40.141-0.10.993+27.50.029-2.60.811+4.80.63959.5%42
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 counted154
Win rate64.3%
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
Low fence80.0%+15.70.28310 ·
Octagon75.0%+10.70.5168 ·
Half fence73.7%+9.40.36119 ·
Breakable full fence72.2%+7.90.45518 ·
Full fence68.8%+4.50.69416 ·
Rectangle64.3%+0.01.00014 ·
Breakable half fence63.6%-0.70.94522 ·
Single wall59.1%-5.20.58322 ·
Open50.0%-14.30.33010 ·
Fence and open20.0%-44.30.0365 ·
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 8.31 on 9 df, p 0.504

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence68.8%16-3.50.824-4.90.748+5.10.743-11.20.529+9.70.542+48.80.055+18.80.339+4.50.796-6.20.751
Breakable full fence+3.50.82472.2%18-1.50.920+8.60.564-7.80.649+13.10.386+52.20.034+22.20.240+7.90.631-2.80.883
Half fence+4.90.748+1.50.92073.7%19+10.00.491-6.30.706+14.60.326+53.70.027+23.70.202+9.40.561-1.30.943
Breakable half fence-5.10.743-8.60.564-10.00.49163.6%22-16.40.355+4.50.757+43.60.076+13.60.467-0.70.968-11.40.559
Low fence+11.20.529+7.80.649+6.30.706+16.40.35580.0%10+20.90.248+60.00.025+30.00.160+15.70.404+5.00.800
Single wall-9.70.542-13.10.386-14.60.326-4.50.757-20.90.24859.1%22+39.10.114+9.10.631-5.20.755-15.90.424
Fence and open-48.80.055-52.20.034-53.70.027-43.60.076-60.00.025-39.10.11420.0%5-30.00.264-44.30.089-55.00.053
Open-18.80.339-22.20.240-23.70.202-13.60.467-30.00.160-9.10.631+30.00.26450.0%10-14.30.484-25.00.280
Rectangle-4.50.796-7.90.631-9.40.561+0.70.968-15.70.404+5.20.755+44.30.089+14.30.48464.3%14-10.70.604
Octagon+6.20.751+2.80.883+1.30.943+11.40.559-5.00.800+15.90.424+55.00.053+25.00.280+10.70.60475.0%8
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 counted302
Win rate58.3%
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
Low fence73.3%+15.10.22515 ·
Breakable full fence73.1%+14.80.10926 ·
Half fence67.7%+9.50.25931 ·
Open66.7%+8.40.35427 ·
Single wall63.0%+4.70.60527 ·
Octagon57.6%-0.70.93133 ·
Breakable half fence54.3%-4.00.61035 ·
Rectangle51.3%-7.00.34239 ·
Full fence43.6%-14.70.04639 ·
Fence and open35.0%-23.30.02920 ·
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 14.71 on 9 df, p 0.099

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence43.6%39-29.50.019-24.10.044-10.70.358-29.70.050-19.40.122+8.60.525-23.10.065-7.70.496-14.00.237
Breakable full fence+29.50.01973.1%26+5.30.661+18.80.134-0.20.986+10.10.430+38.10.010+6.40.611+21.80.079+15.50.217
Half fence+24.10.044-5.30.66167.7%31+13.40.264-5.60.699+4.80.702+32.70.022+1.10.931+16.50.165+10.20.401
Breakable half fence+10.70.358-18.80.134-13.40.26454.3%35-19.00.208-8.70.492+19.30.168-12.40.324+3.00.796-3.30.785
Low fence+29.70.050+0.20.986+5.60.699+19.00.20873.3%15+10.40.495+38.30.025+6.70.654+22.10.142+15.80.296
Single wall+19.40.122-10.10.430-4.80.702+8.70.492-10.40.49563.0%27+28.00.058-3.70.776+11.70.347+5.40.672
Fence and open-8.60.525-38.10.010-32.70.022-19.30.168-38.30.025-28.00.05835.0%20-31.70.031-16.30.235-22.60.111
Open+23.10.065-6.40.611-1.10.931+12.40.324-6.70.654+3.70.776+31.70.03166.7%27+15.40.214+9.10.471
Rectangle+7.70.496-21.80.079-16.50.165-3.00.796-22.10.142-11.70.347+16.30.235-15.40.21451.3%39-6.30.593
Octagon+14.00.237-15.50.217-10.20.401+3.30.785-15.80.296-5.40.672+22.60.111-9.10.471+6.30.59357.6%33
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 counted7
Win rate42.9%
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 fence100.0%+57.10.2121 ·
Single wall33.3%-9.50.6593 ·
Half fence0.0%-42.90.3501 ·
Octagon0.0%-42.90.3501 ·
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 3.00 on 3 df, p 0.392

StageHalfLowWallOct
Half fence0.0%1-100.00.157-33.30.505+0.01.000
Low fence+100.00.157100.0%1+66.70.248+100.00.157
Single wall+33.30.505-66.70.24833.3%3+33.30.505
Octagon-0.01.000-100.00.157-33.30.5050.0%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.