VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Eileen vs Jean

Eileen vs Jean in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Eileen wins 51.5% of 1,196 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 0 of 10 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted1,196
Win rate51.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches9.5 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Eileen's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Open61.0%+9.50.047100
Octagon55.2%+3.70.423105
Rectangle54.5%+3.00.535101
Breakable half fence52.5%+1.00.818120
Breakable full fence51.6%+0.10.975122
Low fence50.8%-0.70.866126
Fence and open49.4%-2.10.68985
Full fence48.8%-2.70.523125
Single wall48.6%-2.90.528107
Half fence48.1%-3.40.407131
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

Eileen's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 6.05 on 9 df, p 0.735

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.8%125-2.80.655+0.70.910-3.70.563-2.00.752+0.20.976-0.60.931-12.20.068-5.70.398-6.40.330
Breakable full fence+2.80.65551.6%122+3.50.573-0.90.893+0.80.894+3.00.646+2.20.752-9.40.162-2.80.675-3.60.588
Half fence-0.70.910-3.50.57348.1%131-4.40.485-2.70.665-0.50.938-1.30.850-12.90.051-6.40.336-7.20.275
Breakable half fence+3.70.563+0.90.893+4.40.48552.5%120+1.70.789+3.90.557+3.10.663-8.50.206-2.00.772-2.70.681
Low fence+2.00.752-0.80.894+2.70.665-1.70.78950.8%126+2.20.738+1.40.844-10.20.125-3.70.583-4.50.500
Single wall-0.20.976-3.00.646+0.50.938-3.90.557-2.20.73848.6%107-0.80.911-12.40.073-5.90.398-6.60.333
Fence and open+0.60.931-2.20.752+1.30.850-3.10.663-1.40.844+0.80.91149.4%85-11.60.114-5.00.493-5.80.424
Open+12.20.068+9.40.162+12.90.051+8.50.206+10.20.125+12.40.073+11.60.11461.0%100+6.50.348+5.80.403
Rectangle+5.70.398+2.80.675+6.40.336+2.00.772+3.70.583+5.90.398+5.00.493-6.50.34854.5%101-0.80.910
Octagon+6.40.330+3.60.588+7.20.275+2.70.681+4.50.500+6.60.333+5.80.424-5.80.403+0.80.91055.2%105
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 counted533
Win rate47.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Eileen's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable half fence61.7%+14.10.04347 ·
Octagon55.4%+7.70.22256 ·
Full fence52.7%+5.10.42655 ·
Open51.5%+3.90.64733 ·
Fence and open48.7%+1.10.89039 ·
Breakable full fence47.3%-0.40.95255 ·
Single wall44.4%-3.20.65245 ·
Rectangle42.1%-5.50.37557 ·
Low fence41.0%-6.70.26861 ·
Half fence36.0%-11.70.08350 ·
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

Eileen's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 10.53 on 9 df, p 0.309

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.7%55+5.50.567+16.70.085-9.00.362+11.80.205+8.30.410+4.00.702+1.20.912+10.60.260-2.60.781
Breakable full fence-5.50.56747.3%55+11.30.242-14.40.145+6.30.496+2.80.778-1.40.890-4.20.700+5.20.582-8.10.394
Half fence-16.70.085-11.30.24236.0%50-25.70.011-5.00.592-8.40.402-12.70.227-15.50.161-6.10.519-19.40.046
Breakable half fence+9.00.362+14.40.145+25.70.01161.7%47+20.70.033+17.30.097+13.00.227+10.20.364+19.60.047+6.30.515
Low fence-11.80.205-6.30.496+5.00.592-20.70.03341.0%61-3.50.722-7.70.447-10.50.327-1.10.902-14.40.120
Single wall-8.30.410-2.80.778+8.40.402-17.30.097+3.50.72244.4%45-4.30.695-7.10.537+2.30.813-10.90.276
Fence and open-4.00.702+1.40.890+12.70.227-13.00.227+7.70.447+4.30.69548.7%39-2.80.813+6.60.522-6.60.524
Open-1.20.912+4.20.700+15.50.161-10.20.364+10.50.327+7.10.537+2.80.81351.5%33+9.40.388-3.80.725
Rectangle-10.60.260-5.20.582+6.10.519-19.60.047+1.10.902-2.30.813-6.60.522-9.40.38842.1%57-13.20.159
Octagon+2.60.781+8.10.394+19.40.046-6.30.515+14.40.120+10.90.276+6.60.524+3.80.725+13.20.15955.4%56
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 counted550
Win rate51.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Eileen's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Rectangle70.3%+19.20.01637 ·
Open60.5%+9.40.20043 ·
Low fence57.4%+6.30.32854 ·
Octagon53.9%+2.80.72139 ·
Breakable full fence51.7%+0.60.91958 ·
Half fence49.2%-1.80.74867 ·
Fence and open47.7%-3.40.64244 ·
Single wall45.3%-5.80.37453 ·
Breakable half fence45.0%-6.10.31760 ·
Full fence45.0%-6.10.31760 ·
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

Eileen's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 10.68 on 9 df, p 0.298

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence45.0%60-6.70.465-4.20.632+0.01.000-12.40.186-0.30.976-2.70.783-15.50.121-25.30.015-8.80.389
Breakable full fence+6.70.46551.7%58+2.50.783+6.70.465-5.70.546+6.40.498+4.00.689-8.80.382-18.60.073-2.10.837
Half fence+4.20.632-2.50.78349.2%67+4.20.632-8.20.372+4.00.665+1.50.875-11.20.250-21.00.038-4.60.648
Breakable half fence-0.01.000-6.70.465-4.20.63245.0%60-12.40.186-0.30.976-2.70.783-15.50.121-25.30.015-8.80.389
Low fence+12.40.186+5.70.546+8.20.372+12.40.18657.4%54+12.10.210+9.70.340-3.10.761-12.90.213+3.60.733
Single wall+0.30.976-6.40.498-4.00.665+0.30.976-12.10.21045.3%53-2.50.810-15.20.139-25.00.019-8.60.417
Fence and open+2.70.783-4.00.689-1.50.875+2.70.783-9.70.340+2.50.81047.7%44-12.70.233-22.50.041-6.10.578
Open+15.50.121+8.80.382+11.20.250+15.50.121+3.10.761+15.20.139+12.70.23360.5%43-9.80.359+6.60.545
Rectangle+25.30.015+18.60.073+21.00.038+25.30.015+12.90.213+25.00.019+22.50.041+9.80.35970.3%37+16.40.141
Octagon+8.80.389+2.10.837+4.60.648+8.80.389-3.60.733+8.60.417+6.10.578-6.60.545-16.40.14153.9%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

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 counted113
Win rate71.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Eileen's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open100.0%+28.30.3702 ·
Single wall88.9%+17.20.2329 ·
Half fence85.7%+14.00.21314 ·
Breakable full fence77.8%+6.10.6729 ·
Open75.0%+3.30.68424 ·
Low fence72.7%+1.10.93511 ·
Rectangle71.4%-0.20.9887 ·
Octagon60.0%-11.70.39010 ·
Breakable half fence53.9%-17.80.12913 ·
Full fence50.0%-21.70.11110 ·
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

Eileen's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 8.76 on 9 df, p 0.459

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%10-27.80.210-35.70.058-3.90.855-22.70.284-38.90.069-50.00.190-25.00.156-21.40.377-10.00.653
Breakable full fence+27.80.21077.8%9-7.90.624+23.90.251+5.00.795-11.10.527-22.20.461+2.80.868+6.30.771+17.80.405
Half fence+35.70.058+7.90.62485.7%14+31.90.070+13.00.420-3.20.825-14.30.568+10.70.435+14.30.432+25.70.151
Breakable half fence+3.90.855-23.90.251-31.90.07053.9%13-18.90.341-35.00.083-46.10.215-21.10.189-17.60.444-6.20.768
Low fence+22.70.284-5.00.795-13.00.420+18.90.34172.7%11-16.20.369-27.30.400-2.30.886+1.30.952+12.70.537
Single wall+38.90.069+11.10.527+3.20.825+35.00.083+16.20.36988.9%9-11.10.621+13.90.385+17.50.375+28.90.153
Fence and open+50.00.190+22.20.461+14.30.568+46.10.215+27.30.400+11.10.621100.0%2+25.00.420+28.60.391+40.00.273
Open+25.00.156-2.80.868-10.70.435+21.10.189+2.30.886-13.90.385-25.00.42075.0%24+3.60.849+15.00.382
Rectangle+21.40.377-6.30.771-14.30.432+17.60.444-1.30.952-17.50.375-28.60.391-3.60.84971.4%7+11.40.627
Octagon+10.00.653-17.80.405-25.70.151+6.20.768-12.70.537-28.90.153-40.00.273-15.00.382-11.40.62760.0%10
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.