VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Lion

Dural vs Lion in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 50.7% of 617 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 0 of 1 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted617
Win rate50.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-1.9 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
Full fence55.6%+4.80.50145 ·
Low fence55.0%+4.30.48660 ·
Fence and open54.4%+3.60.61046 ·
Breakable full fence54.2%+3.50.57159 ·
Open53.6%+2.90.61069 ·
Half fence52.8%+2.00.71172 ·
Rectangle50.0%-0.70.89770 ·
Octagon48.8%-1.90.70582
Single wall46.8%-4.00.51162 ·
Breakable half fence43.3%-7.40.40630 ·
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 2.75 on 9 df, p 0.973

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.6%45+1.30.894+2.80.769+12.20.300+0.60.955+8.80.370+1.20.908+1.90.840+5.60.561+6.80.465
Breakable full fence-1.30.89454.2%59+1.50.868+10.90.331-0.80.933+7.50.412-0.10.991+0.60.945+4.20.631+5.50.523
Half fence-2.80.769-1.50.86852.8%72+9.40.385-2.20.799+6.00.488-1.60.868-0.80.920+2.80.741+4.00.621
Breakable half fence-12.20.300-10.90.331-9.40.38543.3%30-11.70.297-3.40.756-11.00.348-10.30.347-6.70.541-5.50.609
Low fence-0.60.955+0.80.933+2.20.799+11.70.29755.0%60+8.20.364+0.70.947+1.40.876+5.00.569+6.20.464
Single wall-8.80.370-7.50.412-6.00.488+3.40.756-8.20.36446.8%62-7.60.436-6.80.434-3.20.711-2.00.811
Fence and open-1.20.908+0.10.991+1.60.868+11.00.348-0.70.947+7.60.43654.4%46+0.70.939+4.30.647+5.60.545
Open-1.90.840-0.60.945+0.80.920+10.30.347-1.40.876+6.80.434-0.70.93953.6%69+3.60.669+4.80.553
Rectangle-5.60.561-4.20.631-2.80.741+6.70.541-5.00.569+3.20.711-4.30.647-3.60.66950.0%70+1.20.881
Octagon-6.80.465-5.50.523-4.00.621+5.50.609-6.20.464+2.00.811-5.60.545-4.80.553-1.20.88148.8%82
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 counted195
Win rate55.9%
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
Open69.6%+13.70.16023 ·
Octagon65.2%+9.30.33823 ·
Half fence63.6%+7.70.43822 ·
Full fence62.5%+6.60.57916 ·
Breakable full fence52.0%-3.90.67425 ·
Fence and open50.0%-5.90.53424 ·
Low fence50.0%-5.90.67112 ·
Breakable half fence46.7%-9.20.45415 ·
Single wall43.8%-12.20.30716 ·
Rectangle38.5%-17.40.19013 ·
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 7.09 on 9 df, p 0.628

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence62.5%16+10.50.509-1.10.943+15.80.376+12.50.508+18.80.288+12.50.436-7.10.645+24.00.198-2.70.862
Breakable full fence-10.50.50952.0%25-11.60.421+5.30.744+2.00.909+8.20.606+2.00.889-17.60.214+13.50.428-13.20.353
Half fence+1.10.943+11.60.42163.6%22+17.00.306+13.60.440+19.90.224+13.60.351-5.90.673+25.20.149-1.60.912
Breakable half fence-15.80.376-5.30.744-17.00.30646.7%15-3.30.863+2.90.870-3.30.839-22.90.158+8.20.662-18.60.258
Low fence-12.50.508-2.00.909-13.60.440+3.30.86350.0%12+6.20.743+0.01.000-19.60.256+11.50.561-15.20.383
Single wall-18.80.288-8.20.606-19.90.224-2.90.870-6.20.74343.8%16-6.20.698-25.80.107+5.30.774-21.50.184
Fence and open-12.50.436-2.00.889-13.60.351+3.30.839-0.01.000+6.20.69850.0%24-19.60.172+11.50.501-15.20.292
Open+7.10.645+17.60.214+5.90.673+22.90.158+19.60.256+25.80.107+19.60.17269.6%23+31.10.069+4.30.753
Rectangle-24.00.198-13.50.428-25.20.149-8.20.662-11.50.561-5.30.774-11.50.501-31.10.06938.5%13-26.80.121
Octagon+2.70.862+13.20.353+1.60.912+18.60.258+15.20.383+21.50.184+15.20.292-4.30.753+26.80.12165.2%23
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 counted382
Win rate48.2%
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
Fence and open59.1%+10.90.29122 ·
Low fence56.8%+8.70.22244 ·
Breakable full fence55.9%+7.70.34634 ·
Rectangle54.5%+6.40.30655 ·
Full fence50.0%+1.80.84626 ·
Open47.7%-0.40.95044 ·
Single wall45.5%-2.70.70244 ·
Half fence44.4%-3.70.63936 ·
Breakable half fence40.0%-8.20.51815 ·
Octagon39.6%-8.60.20348 ·
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 6.01 on 9 df, p 0.739

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%26-5.90.651+5.60.665+10.00.536-6.80.580+4.50.713-9.10.529+2.30.854-4.50.702+10.40.388
Breakable full fence+5.90.65155.9%34+11.40.339+15.90.305-0.90.934+10.40.361-3.20.813+8.20.475+1.30.902+16.30.145
Half fence-5.60.665-11.40.33944.4%36+4.40.770-12.40.271-1.00.928-14.70.279-3.30.770-10.10.346+4.90.655
Breakable half fence-10.00.536-15.90.305-4.40.77040.0%15-16.80.260-5.50.713-19.10.254-7.70.604-14.60.318+0.40.977
Low fence+6.80.580+0.90.934+12.40.271+16.80.26056.8%44+11.40.286-2.30.860+9.10.393+2.30.821+17.20.098
Single wall-4.50.713-10.40.361+1.00.928+5.50.713-11.40.28645.5%44-13.60.296-2.30.831-9.10.369+5.90.569
Fence and open+9.10.529+3.20.813+14.70.279+19.10.254+2.30.860+13.60.29659.1%22+11.40.384+4.50.717+19.50.128
Open-2.30.854-8.20.475+3.30.770+7.70.604-9.10.393+2.30.831-11.40.38447.7%44-6.80.500+8.20.431
Rectangle+4.50.702-1.30.902+10.10.346+14.60.318-2.30.821+9.10.369-4.50.717+6.80.50054.5%55+15.00.129
Octagon-10.40.388-16.30.145-4.90.655-0.40.977-17.20.098-5.90.569-19.50.128-8.20.431-15.00.12939.6%48
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 counted40
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
Single wall100.0%+50.00.1472 ·
Full fence66.7%+16.70.5483 ·
Half fence57.1%+7.10.50714 ·
Octagon54.5%+4.50.72311 ·
Low fence50.0%+0.01.0004 ·
Open0.0%-50.00.1472 ·
Rectangle0.0%-50.00.1472 ·
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 6.62 on 6 df, p 0.357

StageFullHalfLowWallOpenRectOct
Full fence66.7%3+9.50.761+16.70.659-33.30.361+66.70.136+66.70.136+12.10.707
Half fence-9.50.76157.1%14+7.10.800-42.90.242+57.10.131+57.10.131+2.60.897
Low fence-16.70.659-7.10.80050.0%4-50.00.221+50.00.221+50.00.221-4.50.876
Single wall+33.30.361+42.90.242+50.00.221100.0%2+100.00.046+100.00.046+45.50.224
Open-66.70.136-57.10.131-50.00.221-100.00.0460.0%2+0.01.000-54.50.155
Rectangle-66.70.136-57.10.131-50.00.221-100.00.046-0.01.0000.0%2-54.50.155
Octagon-12.10.707-2.60.897+4.50.876-45.50.224+54.50.155+54.50.15554.5%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: 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.