VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Sarah

Dural vs Sarah in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 49.6% of 790 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 1 of 4 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted790
Win rate49.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-13.3 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
Rectangle62.8%+13.20.01478 ·
Full fence57.0%+7.40.14886
Breakable half fence52.1%+2.50.60494
Breakable full fence50.7%+1.10.84973 ·
Low fence50.0%+0.40.94478 ·
Octagon50.0%+0.40.94770 ·
Half fence49.3%-0.30.95269 ·
Open47.8%-1.80.71492
Single wall36.4%-13.30.00888
Fence and open25.0%-24.60.00828 ·
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 20.67 on 9 df, p 0.014

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.0%86+6.30.428+7.70.339+4.80.514+7.00.371+20.60.006+32.00.003+9.20.222-5.80.446+7.00.385
Breakable full fence-6.30.42850.7%73+1.40.867-1.40.853+0.70.933+14.30.068+25.70.020+2.90.715-12.10.132+0.70.935
Half fence-7.70.339-1.40.86749.3%69-2.90.719-0.70.930+12.90.104+24.30.028+1.40.856-13.50.098-0.70.932
Breakable half fence-4.80.514+1.40.853+2.90.71952.1%94+2.10.781+15.80.032+27.10.011+4.30.557-10.70.159+2.10.787
Low fence-7.00.371-0.70.933+0.70.930-2.10.78150.0%78+13.60.076+25.00.022+2.20.778-12.80.106+0.01.000
Single wall-20.60.006-14.30.068-12.90.104-15.80.032-13.60.07636.4%88+11.40.268-11.50.120-26.5<0.001-13.60.085
Fence and open-32.00.003-25.70.020-24.30.028-27.10.011-25.00.022-11.40.26825.0%28-22.80.032-37.8<0.001-25.00.024
Open-9.20.222-2.90.715-1.40.856-4.30.557-2.20.778+11.50.120+22.80.03247.8%92-15.00.050-2.20.784
Rectangle+5.80.446+12.10.132+13.50.098+10.70.159+12.80.106+26.5<0.001+37.8<0.001+15.00.05062.8%78+12.80.116
Octagon-7.00.385-0.70.935+0.70.932-2.10.787-0.01.000+13.60.085+25.00.024+2.20.784-12.80.11650.0%70
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 counted319
Win rate48.9%
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
Rectangle65.4%+16.50.07926 ·
Octagon57.7%+8.80.35026 ·
Breakable half fence55.8%+6.90.33043 ·
Low fence53.3%+4.40.61030 ·
Full fence52.2%+3.30.63146 ·
Breakable full fence50.0%+1.10.89632 ·
Half fence50.0%+1.10.90328 ·
Open38.5%-10.40.26626 ·
Single wall31.8%-17.10.01544 ·
Fence and open25.0%-23.90.1718 ·
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 13.00 on 9 df, p 0.162

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.2%46+2.20.850+2.20.856-3.60.731-1.20.921+20.40.051+27.20.156+13.70.263-13.20.277-5.50.652
Breakable full fence-2.20.85050.0%32+0.01.000-5.80.618-3.30.793+18.20.109+25.00.204+11.50.380-15.40.239-7.70.559
Half fence-2.20.856-0.01.00050.0%28-5.80.631-3.30.800+18.20.123+25.00.209+11.50.394-15.40.253-7.70.571
Breakable half fence+3.60.731+5.80.618+5.80.63155.8%43+2.50.834+24.00.024+30.80.109+17.40.162-9.60.433-1.90.879
Low fence+1.20.921+3.30.793+3.30.800-2.50.83453.3%30+21.50.064+28.30.154+14.90.266-12.10.361-4.40.743
Single wall-20.40.051-18.20.109-18.20.123-24.00.024-21.50.06431.8%44+6.80.701-6.60.572-33.60.006-25.90.034
Fence and open-27.20.156-25.00.204-25.00.209-30.80.109-28.30.154-6.80.70125.0%8-13.50.486-40.40.044-32.70.106
Open-13.70.263-11.50.380-11.50.394-17.40.162-14.90.266+6.60.572+13.50.48638.5%26-26.90.052-19.20.165
Rectangle+13.20.277+15.40.239+15.40.253+9.60.433+12.10.361+33.60.006+40.40.044+26.90.05265.4%26+7.70.569
Octagon+5.50.652+7.70.559+7.70.571+1.90.879+4.40.743+25.90.034+32.70.106+19.20.165-7.70.56957.7%26
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 counted431
Win rate49.6%
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
Full fence63.9%+14.20.07436 ·
Rectangle61.2%+11.60.08549 ·
Breakable half fence50.0%+0.30.96144 ·
Open49.2%-0.50.93761 ·
Octagon48.8%-0.90.90741 ·
Breakable full fence48.7%-0.90.90339 ·
Low fence47.7%-1.90.78844 ·
Half fence43.2%-6.40.41537 ·
Single wall42.9%-6.80.35442 ·
Fence and open27.8%-21.90.05818 ·
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 10.47 on 9 df, p 0.314

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence63.9%36+15.20.186+20.60.077+13.90.213+16.20.148+21.00.064+36.10.012+14.70.160+2.70.802+15.10.183
Breakable full fence-15.20.18648.7%39+5.50.632-1.30.907+1.00.928+5.90.597+20.90.137-0.50.964-12.50.241-0.10.996
Half fence-20.60.077-5.50.63243.2%37-6.80.544-4.50.687+0.40.972+15.50.268-5.90.568-18.00.098-5.50.624
Breakable half fence-13.90.213+1.30.907+6.80.54450.0%44+2.30.831+7.10.507+22.20.109+0.80.934-11.20.276+1.20.911
Low fence-16.20.148-1.00.928+4.50.687-2.30.83147.7%44+4.90.650+19.90.148-1.40.883-13.50.192-1.10.923
Single wall-21.00.064-5.90.597-0.40.972-7.10.507-4.90.65042.9%42+15.10.271-6.30.527-18.40.080-5.90.588
Fence and open-36.10.012-20.90.137-15.50.268-22.20.109-19.90.148-15.10.27127.8%18-21.40.108-33.40.015-21.00.133
Open-14.70.160+0.50.964+5.90.568-0.80.934+1.40.883+6.30.527+21.40.10849.2%61-12.00.207+0.40.968
Rectangle-2.70.802+12.50.241+18.00.098+11.20.276+13.50.192+18.40.080+33.40.015+12.00.20761.2%49+12.40.237
Octagon-15.10.183+0.10.996+5.50.624-1.20.911+1.10.923+5.90.588+21.00.133-0.40.968-12.40.23748.8%41
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 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
Breakable full fence100.0%+45.00.1892 ·
Half fence100.0%+45.00.0574 ·
Open80.0%+25.00.2305 ·
Rectangle66.7%+11.70.6733 ·
Full fence50.0%-5.00.8324 ·
Low fence50.0%-5.00.8324 ·
Breakable half fence42.9%-12.10.4777 ·
Fence and open0.0%-55.00.1092 ·
Octagon0.0%-55.00.0463 ·
Single wall0.0%-55.00.1092 ·
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 15.21 on 9 df, p 0.085

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%4-50.00.221-50.00.102+7.10.819+0.01.000+50.00.221+50.00.221-30.00.343-16.70.659+50.00.147
Breakable full fence+50.00.221100.0%2+0.01.000+57.10.151+50.00.221+100.00.046+100.00.046+20.00.495+33.30.361+100.00.025
Half fence+50.00.102-0.01.000100.0%4+57.10.058+50.00.102+100.00.014+100.00.014+20.00.343+33.30.212+100.00.008
Breakable half fence-7.10.819-57.10.151-57.10.05842.9%7-7.10.819+42.90.257+42.90.257-37.10.198-23.80.490+42.90.175
Low fence-0.01.000-50.00.221-50.00.102+7.10.81950.0%4+50.00.221+50.00.221-30.00.343-16.70.659+50.00.147
Single wall-50.00.221-100.00.046-100.00.014-42.90.257-50.00.2210.0%2+0.01.000-80.00.053-66.70.136+0.01.000
Fence and open-50.00.221-100.00.046-100.00.014-42.90.257-50.00.221-0.01.0000.0%2-80.00.053-66.70.136+0.01.000
Open+30.00.343-20.00.495-20.00.343+37.10.198+30.00.343+80.00.053+80.00.05380.0%5+13.30.673+80.00.028
Rectangle+16.70.659-33.30.361-33.30.212+23.80.490+16.70.659+66.70.136+66.70.136-13.30.67366.7%3+66.70.083
Octagon-50.00.147-100.00.025-100.00.008-42.90.175-50.00.147-0.01.000-0.01.000-80.00.028-66.70.0830.0%3
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.