Virtua Fighter 5 REVO · v1.10 · Character Matchup Winrates
Eileen vs Jacky
Matches counted1,283
Win rate52.2%
Widest swing12.4 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Eileen's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fence and open | 64.6% | +12.4 | 0.040 | 65 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 58.6% | +6.3 | 0.162 | 111 | |
| Full fence | 53.9% | +1.7 | 0.672 | 141 | |
| Rectangle | 53.5% | +1.3 | 0.731 | 157 | |
| Breakable half fence | 52.6% | +0.4 | 0.927 | 114 | |
| Octagon | 51.4% | -0.8 | 0.842 | 140 | |
| Open | 50.0% | -2.2 | 0.602 | 124 | |
| Single wall | 48.5% | -3.7 | 0.364 | 132 | |
| Low fence | 46.3% | -5.9 | 0.198 | 108 | |
| Half fence | 45.0% | -7.2 | 0.070 | 140 |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Eileen's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 11.42 on 9 df, p 0.248
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 53.9%141 | -4.70.460 | +8.90.136 | +1.30.840 | +7.60.234 | +5.40.371 | -10.70.149 | +3.90.526 | +0.40.945 | +2.50.678 |
| Breakable full fence | +4.70.460 | 58.6%111 | +13.60.033 | +5.90.371 | +12.30.069 | +10.10.117 | -6.10.427 | +8.60.189 | +5.10.412 | +7.10.260 |
| Half fence | -8.90.136 | -13.60.033 | 45.0%140 | -7.60.226 | -1.30.839 | -3.50.565 | -19.60.009 | -5.00.417 | -8.50.143 | -6.40.282 |
| Breakable half fence | -1.30.840 | -5.90.371 | +7.60.226 | 52.6%114 | +6.30.345 | +4.20.517 | -12.00.119 | +2.60.685 | -0.90.887 | +1.20.849 |
| Low fence | -7.60.234 | -12.30.069 | +1.30.839 | -6.30.345 | 46.3%108 | -2.20.736 | -18.30.019 | -3.70.573 | -7.20.249 | -5.10.423 |
| Single wall | -5.40.371 | -10.10.117 | +3.50.565 | -4.20.517 | +2.20.736 | 48.5%132 | -16.10.033 | -1.50.809 | -5.00.395 | -3.00.627 |
| Fence and open | +10.70.149 | +6.10.427 | +19.60.009 | +12.00.119 | +18.30.019 | +16.10.033 | 64.6%65 | +14.60.055 | +11.10.128 | +13.20.077 |
| Open | -3.90.526 | -8.60.189 | +5.00.417 | -2.60.685 | +3.70.573 | +1.50.809 | -14.60.055 | 50.0%124 | -3.50.559 | -1.40.817 |
| Rectangle | -0.40.945 | -5.10.412 | +8.50.143 | +0.90.887 | +7.20.249 | +5.00.395 | -11.10.128 | +3.50.559 | 53.5%157 | +2.10.721 |
| Octagon | -2.50.678 | -7.10.260 | +6.40.282 | -1.20.849 | +5.10.423 | +3.00.627 | -13.20.077 | +1.40.817 | -2.10.721 | 51.4%140 |
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
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.
Matches counted933
Win rate54.3%
Widest swing8.2 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Eileen's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fence and open | 62.5% | +8.2 | 0.290 | 40 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 61.7% | +7.4 | 0.162 | 81 | |
| Rectangle | 55.6% | +1.2 | 0.769 | 126 | |
| Octagon | 55.5% | +1.1 | 0.813 | 101 | |
| Single wall | 55.0% | +0.6 | 0.903 | 91 | |
| Full fence | 53.9% | -0.4 | 0.928 | 102 | |
| Open | 51.8% | -2.6 | 0.617 | 85 | |
| Low fence | 50.7% | -3.7 | 0.505 | 75 · | |
| Half fence | 50.0% | -4.3 | 0.351 | 102 | |
| Breakable half fence | 49.4% | -4.9 | 0.339 | 85 |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Eileen's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 5.23 on 9 df, p 0.814
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 53.9%102 | -7.80.289 | +3.90.575 | +4.50.539 | +3.20.668 | -1.00.887 | -8.60.354 | +2.20.769 | -1.60.805 | -1.50.827 |
| Breakable full fence | +7.80.289 | 61.7%81 | +11.70.113 | +12.30.111 | +11.10.164 | +6.80.368 | -0.80.934 | +10.00.195 | +6.20.380 | +6.30.393 |
| Half fence | -3.90.575 | -11.70.113 | 50.0%102 | +0.60.936 | -0.70.930 | -5.00.492 | -12.50.179 | -1.80.810 | -5.60.403 | -5.50.437 |
| Breakable half fence | -4.50.539 | -12.30.111 | -0.60.936 | 49.4%85 | -1.30.874 | -5.50.463 | -13.10.171 | -2.40.759 | -6.20.380 | -6.00.412 |
| Low fence | -3.20.668 | -11.10.164 | +0.70.930 | +1.30.874 | 50.7%75 | -4.30.583 | -11.80.225 | -1.10.890 | -4.90.501 | -4.80.530 |
| Single wall | +1.00.887 | -6.80.368 | +5.00.492 | +5.50.463 | +4.30.583 | 55.0%91 | -7.50.421 | +3.20.673 | -0.60.929 | -0.50.944 |
| Fence and open | +8.60.354 | +0.80.934 | +12.50.179 | +13.10.171 | +11.80.225 | +7.50.421 | 62.5%40 | +10.70.260 | +6.90.439 | +7.00.445 |
| Open | -2.20.769 | -10.00.195 | +1.80.810 | +2.40.759 | +1.10.890 | -3.20.673 | -10.70.260 | 51.8%85 | -3.80.588 | -3.70.616 |
| Rectangle | +1.60.805 | -6.20.380 | +5.60.403 | +6.20.380 | +4.90.501 | +0.60.929 | -6.90.439 | +3.80.588 | 55.6%126 | +0.10.987 |
| Octagon | +1.50.827 | -6.30.393 | +5.50.437 | +6.00.412 | +4.80.530 | +0.50.944 | -7.00.445 | +3.70.616 | -0.10.987 | 55.5%101 |
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
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.
Matches counted350
Win rate46.6%
Widest swing21.4 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Eileen's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fence and open | 68.0% | +21.4 | 0.026 | 25 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 62.1% | +15.5 | 0.081 | 29 · | |
| Full fence | 53.9% | +7.3 | 0.334 | 39 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 50.0% | +3.4 | 0.694 | 30 · | |
| Open | 46.1% | -0.4 | 0.956 | 39 · | |
| Rectangle | 45.2% | -1.4 | 0.869 | 31 · | |
| Octagon | 41.0% | -5.5 | 0.461 | 39 · | |
| Low fence | 36.4% | -10.2 | 0.217 | 33 · | |
| Single wall | 34.1% | -12.4 | 0.090 | 41 · | |
| Half fence | 31.6% | -15.0 | 0.050 | 38 · |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Eileen's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 16.18 on 9 df, p 0.063
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 53.9%39 | +3.90.751 | +22.30.048 | -8.20.498 | +17.50.138 | +19.70.076 | -14.20.261 | +7.70.497 | +8.70.470 | +12.80.257 |
| Breakable full fence | -3.90.751 | 50.0%30 | +18.40.123 | -12.10.351 | +13.60.275 | +15.80.179 | -18.00.178 | +3.90.751 | +4.80.705 | +9.00.458 |
| Half fence | -22.30.048 | -18.40.123 | 31.6%38 | -30.50.013 | -4.80.671 | -2.60.808 | -36.40.005 | -14.60.190 | -13.60.247 | -9.40.389 |
| Breakable half fence | +8.20.498 | +12.10.351 | +30.50.013 | 62.1%29 | +25.70.043 | +27.90.021 | -5.90.649 | +15.90.193 | +16.90.190 | +21.00.086 |
| Low fence | -17.50.138 | -13.60.275 | +4.80.671 | -25.70.043 | 36.4%33 | +2.20.843 | -31.60.017 | -9.80.401 | -8.80.474 | -4.70.686 |
| Single wall | -19.70.076 | -15.80.179 | +2.60.808 | -27.90.021 | -2.20.843 | 34.1%41 | -33.90.008 | -12.00.273 | -11.00.342 | -6.90.525 |
| Fence and open | +14.20.261 | +18.00.178 | +36.40.005 | +5.90.649 | +31.60.017 | +33.90.008 | 68.0%25 | +21.90.087 | +22.80.087 | +27.00.035 |
| Open | -7.70.497 | -3.90.751 | +14.60.190 | -15.90.193 | +9.80.401 | +12.00.273 | -21.90.087 | 46.1%39 | +1.00.934 | +5.10.648 |
| Rectangle | -8.70.470 | -4.80.705 | +13.60.247 | -16.90.190 | +8.80.474 | +11.00.342 | -22.80.087 | -1.00.934 | 45.2%31 | +4.10.728 |
| Octagon | -12.80.257 | -9.00.458 | +9.40.389 | -21.00.086 | +4.70.686 | +6.90.525 | -27.00.035 | -5.10.648 | -4.10.728 | 41.0%39 |
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
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.