VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Dural vs Shun

Dural vs Shun in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Dural wins 56.7% of 804 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 0 of 5 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted804
Win rate56.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.0 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
Low fence66.7%+9.90.07472 ·
Half fence60.3%+3.50.52073 ·
Single wall57.5%+0.70.87994
Fence and open57.4%+0.70.91554 ·
Full fence57.1%+0.40.92898
Open57.0%+0.30.95986
Breakable half fence55.7%-1.10.814106
Rectangle53.7%-3.00.52595
Breakable full fence53.6%-3.10.58869 ·
Octagon46.9%-9.80.25232 ·
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 5.24 on 9 df, p 0.813

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.1%98+3.50.652-3.10.681+1.50.831-9.50.208-0.30.966-0.30.975+0.20.982+3.50.629+10.30.311
Breakable full fence-3.50.65253.6%69-6.70.424-2.00.791-13.10.114-3.80.627-3.80.675-3.40.676-0.10.994+6.70.528
Half fence+3.10.681+6.70.42460.3%73+4.60.539-6.40.424+2.80.713+2.90.745+3.30.674+6.60.393+13.40.203
Breakable half fence-1.50.831+2.00.791-4.60.53955.7%106-11.00.141-1.80.799-1.80.833-1.30.855+2.00.779+8.80.382
Low fence+9.50.208+13.10.114+6.40.424+11.00.14166.7%72+9.20.226+9.30.288+9.70.213+13.00.091+19.80.057
Single wall+0.30.966+3.80.627-2.80.713+1.80.799-9.20.22657.5%94+0.00.996+0.50.949+3.80.603+10.60.299
Fence and open+0.30.975+3.80.675-2.90.745+1.80.833-9.30.288-0.00.99657.4%54+0.40.960+3.70.661+10.50.344
Open-0.20.982+3.40.676-3.30.674+1.30.855-9.70.213-0.50.949-0.40.96057.0%86+3.30.656+10.10.327
Rectangle-3.50.629+0.10.994-6.60.393-2.00.779-13.00.091-3.80.603-3.70.661-3.30.65653.7%95+6.80.505
Octagon-10.30.311-6.70.528-13.40.203-8.80.382-19.80.057-10.60.299-10.50.344-10.10.327-6.80.50546.9%32
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 counted259
Win rate61.0%
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
Octagon81.8%+20.80.14811 ·
Low fence69.6%+8.60.37823 ·
Breakable half fence66.7%+5.70.49930 ·
Open66.7%+5.70.47533 ·
Single wall66.7%+5.70.55024 ·
Rectangle58.6%-2.40.78029 ·
Full fence55.9%-5.10.51134 ·
Breakable full fence55.6%-5.40.54027 ·
Fence and open53.3%-7.70.53015 ·
Half fence51.9%-9.20.30327 ·
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 5.98 on 9 df, p 0.742

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.9%34+0.30.980+4.00.754-10.80.378-13.70.298-10.80.408+2.50.869-10.80.365-2.70.827-25.90.123
Breakable full fence-0.30.98055.6%27+3.70.785-11.10.390-14.00.309-11.10.417+2.20.890-11.10.379-3.10.817-26.30.128
Half fence-4.00.754-3.70.78551.9%27-14.80.255-17.70.203-14.80.283-1.50.927-14.80.244-6.80.611-30.00.087
Breakable half fence+10.80.378+11.10.390+14.80.25566.7%30-2.90.823+0.01.000+13.30.384+0.01.000+8.10.523-15.20.345
Low fence+13.70.298+14.00.309+17.70.203+2.90.82369.6%23+2.90.831+16.20.311+2.90.819+10.90.416-12.20.449
Single wall+10.80.408+11.10.417+14.80.283-0.01.000-2.90.83166.7%24+13.30.405+0.01.000+8.10.547-15.20.357
Fence and open-2.50.869-2.20.890+1.50.927-13.30.384-16.20.311-13.30.40553.3%15-13.30.376-5.30.737-28.50.131
Open+10.80.365+11.10.379+14.80.244-0.01.000-2.90.819-0.01.000+13.30.37666.7%33+8.10.513-15.20.340
Rectangle+2.70.827+3.10.817+6.80.611-8.10.523-10.90.416-8.10.547+5.30.737-8.10.51358.6%29-23.20.170
Octagon+25.90.123+26.30.128+30.00.087+15.20.345+12.20.449+15.20.357+28.50.131+15.20.340+23.20.17081.8%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: 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 counted530
Win rate54.5%
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
Half fence65.2%+10.70.12846 ·
Low fence64.6%+10.10.14248 ·
Fence and open61.1%+6.60.41136 ·
Full fence57.1%+2.60.65763 ·
Breakable full fence55.6%+1.00.89836 ·
Single wall53.6%-0.90.87169 ·
Rectangle51.5%-3.00.59966 ·
Breakable half fence50.7%-3.90.46975 ·
Open49.0%-5.50.40651 ·
Octagon28.6%-26.00.01521 ·
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 11.94 on 9 df, p 0.217

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.1%63+1.60.878-8.10.394+6.50.447-7.40.427+3.50.685-4.00.700+8.10.387+5.60.521+28.60.023
Breakable full fence-1.60.87855.6%36-9.70.373+4.90.629-9.00.402+1.90.850-5.50.633+6.50.548+4.00.696+27.00.048
Half fence+8.10.394+9.70.37365.2%46+14.60.117+0.60.949+11.60.217+4.10.702+16.20.108+13.70.149+36.60.005
Breakable half fence-6.50.447-4.90.629-14.60.11750.7%75-13.90.129-3.00.723-10.40.301+1.60.856-0.80.920+22.10.072
Low fence+7.40.427+9.00.402-0.60.949+13.90.12964.6%48+11.00.237+3.50.744+15.60.118+13.10.164+36.00.006
Single wall-3.50.685-1.90.850-11.60.217+3.00.723-11.00.23753.6%69-7.50.463+4.60.618+2.10.806+25.10.044
Fence and open+4.00.700+5.50.633-4.10.702+10.40.301-3.50.744+7.50.46361.1%36+12.10.265+9.60.352+32.50.018
Open-8.10.387-6.50.548-16.20.108-1.60.856-15.60.118-4.60.618-12.10.26549.0%51-2.50.789+20.40.111
Rectangle-5.60.521-4.00.696-13.70.149+0.80.920-13.10.164-2.10.806-9.60.352+2.50.78951.5%66+22.90.066
Octagon-28.60.023-27.00.048-36.60.005-22.10.072-36.00.006-25.10.044-32.50.018-20.40.111-22.90.06628.6%21
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 counted15
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
Breakable half fence100.0%+40.00.3981 ·
Full fence100.0%+40.00.3981 ·
Low fence100.0%+40.00.3981 ·
Open100.0%+40.00.2152 ·
Single wall100.0%+40.00.3981 ·
Breakable full fence33.3%-26.70.0856 ·
Fence and open33.3%-26.70.2923 ·
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 6.67 on 6 df, p 0.353

StageFullBreak. fullBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpen
Full fence100.0%1+66.70.212+0.01.000+0.01.000+0.01.000+66.70.248+0.01.000
Breakable full fence-66.70.21233.3%6-66.70.212-66.70.212-66.70.212+0.01.000-66.70.102
Breakable half fence-0.01.000+66.70.212100.0%1+0.01.000+0.01.000+66.70.248+0.01.000
Low fence-0.01.000+66.70.212-0.01.000100.0%1+0.01.000+66.70.248+0.01.000
Single wall-0.01.000+66.70.212-0.01.000-0.01.000100.0%1+66.70.248+0.01.000
Fence and open-66.70.248-0.01.000-66.70.248-66.70.248-66.70.24833.3%3-66.70.136
Open-0.01.000+66.70.102-0.01.000-0.01.000-0.01.000+66.70.136100.0%2
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.