VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Pai

Dural vs Pai in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 51.2% of 848 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 0 of 7 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted848
Win rate51.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-9.6 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
Rectangle59.8%+8.60.10282
Single wall58.0%+6.80.19581
Breakable half fence57.5%+6.30.21587
Open56.6%+5.40.32476 ·
Half fence54.0%+2.80.61376 ·
Breakable full fence48.5%-2.60.568103
Octagon48.4%-2.80.56895
Full fence45.2%-5.90.25184
Low fence41.6%-9.60.05589
Fence and open33.3%-17.90.02936 ·
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 16.06 on 9 df, p 0.066

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence45.2%84-3.30.652-8.70.271-12.20.110+3.70.627-12.80.100+11.90.225-11.30.152-14.50.061-3.20.670
Breakable full fence+3.30.65248.5%103-5.40.475-8.90.219+7.00.333-9.50.201+15.20.114-8.00.288-11.20.129+0.10.986
Half fence+8.70.271+5.40.47554.0%76-3.50.651+12.40.113-4.10.607+20.60.041-2.60.744-5.80.461+5.50.473
Breakable half fence+12.20.110+8.90.219+3.50.65157.5%87+15.90.035-0.60.942+24.10.015+0.90.909-2.30.763+9.10.222
Low fence-3.70.627-7.00.333-12.40.113-15.90.03541.6%89-16.40.032+8.20.393-15.00.055-18.20.018-6.80.351
Single wall+12.80.100+9.50.201+4.10.607+0.60.942+16.40.03258.0%81+24.70.014+1.40.855-1.70.822+9.60.203
Fence and open-11.90.225-15.20.114-20.60.041-24.10.015-8.20.393-24.70.01433.3%36-23.20.022-26.40.008-15.10.121
Open+11.30.152+8.00.288+2.60.744-0.90.909+15.00.055-1.40.855+23.20.02256.6%76-3.20.686+8.20.289
Rectangle+14.50.061+11.20.129+5.80.461+2.30.763+18.20.018+1.70.822+26.40.008+3.20.68659.8%82+11.30.132
Octagon+3.20.670-0.10.986-5.50.473-9.10.222+6.80.351-9.60.203+15.10.121-8.20.289-11.30.13248.4%95
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 counted404
Win rate52.2%
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
Open69.2%+17.00.02539 ·
Breakable half fence63.0%+10.70.09054 ·
Single wall56.0%+3.80.69725 ·
Rectangle54.4%+2.10.76046 ·
Half fence54.0%+1.80.81537 ·
Breakable full fence51.2%-1.10.88243 ·
Octagon48.9%-3.30.63445 ·
Full fence42.2%-10.00.15445 ·
Low fence38.5%-13.80.07039 ·
Fence and open30.0%-22.20.15410 ·
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 14.25 on 9 df, p 0.114

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence42.2%45-8.90.401-11.80.286-20.70.039+3.80.726-13.80.269+12.20.475-27.00.013-12.10.247-6.70.525
Breakable full fence+8.90.40151.2%43-2.90.796-11.80.243+12.70.248-4.80.700+21.20.227-18.10.096-3.20.764+2.30.831
Half fence+11.80.286+2.90.79654.0%37-8.90.395+15.60.173-1.90.880+24.10.177-15.20.173-0.30.979+5.20.641
Breakable half fence+20.70.039+11.80.243+8.90.39563.0%54+24.50.020+7.00.556+33.00.053-6.30.530+8.60.383+14.10.160
Low fence-3.80.726-12.70.248-15.60.173-24.50.02038.5%39-17.50.169+8.50.620-30.80.006-15.90.144-10.40.337
Single wall+13.80.269+4.80.700+1.90.880-7.00.556+17.50.16956.0%25+26.00.164-13.20.282+1.60.894+7.10.568
Fence and open-12.20.475-21.20.227-24.10.177-33.00.053-8.50.620-26.00.16430.0%10-39.20.023-24.40.163-18.90.278
Open+27.00.013+18.10.096+15.20.173+6.30.530+30.80.006+13.20.282+39.20.02369.2%39+14.90.161+20.30.059
Rectangle+12.10.247+3.20.764+0.30.979-8.60.383+15.90.144-1.60.894+24.40.163-14.90.16154.4%46+5.50.602
Octagon+6.70.525-2.30.831-5.20.641-14.10.160+10.40.337-7.10.568+18.90.278-20.30.059-5.50.60248.9%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 counted424
Win rate50.5%
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
Rectangle66.7%+16.20.04236 ·
Single wall61.5%+11.10.08852 ·
Half fence52.6%+2.20.78038 ·
Breakable half fence50.0%-0.50.95632 ·
Full fence48.6%-1.90.81435 ·
Octagon48.0%-2.50.71050 ·
Breakable full fence45.8%-4.70.43659 ·
Low fence44.0%-6.50.33050 ·
Open40.6%-9.80.24732 ·
Fence and open36.0%-14.50.13625 ·
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 11.21 on 9 df, p 0.262

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.6%35+2.80.792-4.10.729-1.40.907+4.60.677-13.00.232+12.60.333+8.00.514-18.10.123+0.60.959
Breakable full fence-2.80.79245.8%59-6.90.509-4.20.699+1.80.854-15.80.096+9.80.408+5.10.637-20.90.047-2.20.816
Half fence+4.10.729+6.90.50952.6%38+2.60.826+8.60.422-8.90.398+16.60.195+12.00.316-14.00.219+4.60.667
Breakable half fence+1.40.907+4.20.699-2.60.82650.0%32+6.00.595-11.50.299+14.00.291+9.40.451-16.70.163+2.00.860
Low fence-4.60.677-1.80.854-8.60.422-6.00.59544.0%50-17.50.076+8.00.507+3.40.763-22.70.038-4.00.688
Single wall+13.00.232+15.80.096+8.90.398+11.50.299+17.50.07661.5%52+25.50.035+20.90.062-5.10.623+13.50.170
Fence and open-12.60.333-9.80.408-16.60.195-14.00.291-8.00.507-25.50.03536.0%25-4.60.722-30.70.018-12.00.324
Open-8.00.514-5.10.637-12.00.316-9.40.451-3.40.763-20.90.062+4.60.72240.6%32-26.10.031-7.40.513
Rectangle+18.10.123+20.90.047+14.00.219+16.70.163+22.70.038+5.10.623+30.70.018+26.10.03166.7%36+18.70.085
Octagon-0.60.959+2.20.816-4.60.667-2.00.860+4.00.688-13.50.170+12.00.324+7.40.513-18.70.08548.0%50
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 counted20
Win rate45.0%
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 full fence100.0%+55.00.2571 ·
Half fence100.0%+55.00.2571 ·
Open60.0%+15.00.4365 ·
Full fence50.0%+5.00.8224 ·
Single wall25.0%-20.00.3694 ·
Breakable half fence0.0%-45.00.3531 ·
Fence and open0.0%-45.00.3531 ·
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 5.16 on 6 df, p 0.524

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfWallMixedOpen
Full fence50.0%4-50.00.361-50.00.361+50.00.361+25.00.465+50.00.361-10.00.764
Breakable full fence+50.00.361100.0%1+0.01.000+100.00.157+75.00.171+100.00.157+40.00.439
Half fence+50.00.361-0.01.000100.0%1+100.00.157+75.00.171+100.00.157+40.00.439
Breakable half fence-50.00.361-100.00.157-100.00.1570.0%1-25.00.576+0.01.000-60.00.273
Single wall-25.00.465-75.00.171-75.00.171+25.00.57625.0%4+25.00.576-35.00.294
Fence and open-50.00.361-100.00.157-100.00.157-0.01.000-25.00.5760.0%1-60.00.273
Open+10.00.764-40.00.439-40.00.439+60.00.273+35.00.294+60.00.27360.0%5
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.