Virtua Fighter 5 REVO · v1.10 · Character Matchup Winrates
Eileen vs Vanessa
Matches counted490
Win rate58.4%
Widest swing-12.7 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 67.4% | +9.0 | 0.192 | 46 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 63.6% | +5.3 | 0.400 | 55 · | |
| Fence and open | 62.5% | +4.1 | 0.674 | 24 · | |
| Single wall | 60.7% | +2.3 | 0.698 | 61 · | |
| Octagon | 58.7% | +0.3 | 0.962 | 46 · | |
| Rectangle | 56.9% | -1.5 | 0.818 | 51 · | |
| Low fence | 56.8% | -1.6 | 0.836 | 37 · | |
| Open | 56.4% | -2.0 | 0.749 | 55 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 52.5% | -5.9 | 0.317 | 61 · | |
| Half fence | 45.7% | -12.7 | 0.115 | 35 · |
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 5.82 on 9 df, p 0.758
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 67.4%46 | +3.80.693 | +21.70.050 | +14.90.120 | +10.60.319 | +6.70.474 | +4.90.682 | +11.00.257 | +10.50.286 | +8.70.388 |
| Breakable full fence | -3.80.693 | 63.6%55 | +17.90.094 | +11.20.224 | +6.90.507 | +3.00.741 | +1.10.923 | +7.30.436 | +6.80.476 | +4.90.612 |
| Half fence | -21.70.050 | -17.90.094 | 45.7%35 | -6.80.525 | -11.10.349 | -14.90.156 | -16.80.205 | -10.70.324 | -11.20.309 | -13.00.246 |
| Breakable half fence | -14.90.120 | -11.20.224 | +6.80.525 | 52.5%61 | -4.30.679 | -8.20.361 | -10.00.402 | -3.90.673 | -4.40.641 | -6.20.521 |
| Low fence | -10.60.319 | -6.90.507 | +11.10.349 | +4.30.679 | 56.8%37 | -3.90.703 | -5.70.656 | +0.40.970 | -0.10.992 | -1.90.859 |
| Single wall | -6.70.474 | -3.00.741 | +14.90.156 | +8.20.361 | +3.90.703 | 60.7%61 | -1.80.875 | +4.30.639 | +3.80.684 | +2.00.838 |
| Fence and open | -4.90.682 | -1.10.923 | +16.80.205 | +10.00.402 | +5.70.656 | +1.80.875 | 62.5%24 | +6.10.611 | +5.60.644 | +3.80.758 |
| Open | -11.00.257 | -7.30.436 | +10.70.324 | +3.90.673 | -0.40.970 | -4.30.639 | -6.10.611 | 56.4%55 | -0.50.959 | -2.30.813 |
| Rectangle | -10.50.286 | -6.80.476 | +11.20.309 | +4.40.641 | +0.10.992 | -3.80.684 | -5.60.644 | +0.50.959 | 56.9%51 | -1.80.855 |
| Octagon | -8.70.388 | -4.90.612 | +13.00.246 | +6.20.521 | +1.90.859 | -2.00.838 | -3.80.758 | +2.30.813 | +1.80.855 | 58.7%46 |
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 counted332
Win rate56.9%
Widest swing-9.9 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single wall | 66.7% | +9.7 | 0.141 | 48 · | |
| Rectangle | 63.3% | +6.4 | 0.458 | 30 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 60.6% | +3.7 | 0.653 | 33 · | |
| Fence and open | 59.1% | +2.2 | 0.832 | 22 · | |
| Full fence | 58.1% | +1.1 | 0.893 | 31 · | |
| Low fence | 57.1% | +0.2 | 0.981 | 28 · | |
| Open | 54.8% | -2.2 | 0.762 | 42 · | |
| Octagon | 50.0% | -6.9 | 0.422 | 30 · | |
| Half fence | 47.8% | -9.1 | 0.361 | 23 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 47.1% | -9.9 | 0.220 | 34 · |
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 5.40 on 9 df, p 0.798
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 58.1%31 | -2.50.836 | +10.20.456 | +11.00.375 | +0.90.943 | -8.60.439 | -1.00.940 | +3.30.779 | -5.30.674 | +8.10.527 |
| Breakable full fence | +2.50.836 | 60.6%33 | +12.80.344 | +13.60.266 | +3.50.784 | -6.10.576 | +1.50.911 | +5.80.611 | -2.70.824 | +10.60.397 |
| Half fence | -10.20.456 | -12.80.344 | 47.8%23 | +0.80.955 | -9.30.507 | -18.80.128 | -11.30.449 | -6.90.592 | -15.50.259 | -2.20.875 |
| Breakable half fence | -11.00.375 | -13.60.266 | -0.80.955 | 47.1%34 | -10.10.429 | -19.60.076 | -12.00.379 | -7.70.504 | -16.30.192 | -2.90.814 |
| Low fence | -0.90.943 | -3.50.784 | +9.30.507 | +10.10.429 | 57.1%28 | -9.50.406 | -1.90.890 | +2.40.844 | -6.20.630 | +7.10.586 |
| Single wall | +8.60.439 | +6.10.576 | +18.80.128 | +19.60.076 | +9.50.406 | 66.7%48 | +7.60.539 | +11.90.248 | +3.30.763 | +16.70.143 |
| Fence and open | +1.00.940 | -1.50.911 | +11.30.449 | +12.00.379 | +1.90.890 | -7.60.539 | 59.1%22 | +4.30.740 | -4.20.756 | +9.10.516 |
| Open | -3.30.779 | -5.80.611 | +6.90.592 | +7.70.504 | -2.40.844 | -11.90.248 | -4.30.740 | 54.8%42 | -8.60.467 | +4.80.690 |
| Rectangle | +5.30.674 | +2.70.824 | +15.50.259 | +16.30.192 | +6.20.630 | -3.30.763 | +4.20.756 | +8.60.467 | 63.3%30 | +13.30.297 |
| Octagon | -8.10.527 | -10.60.397 | +2.20.875 | +2.90.814 | -7.10.586 | -16.70.143 | -9.10.516 | -4.80.690 | -13.30.297 | 50.0%30 |
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 counted158
Win rate61.4%
Widest swing38.6 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 | 100.0% | +38.6 | 0.259 | 2 · | |
| Full fence | 86.7% | +25.3 | 0.035 | 15 · | |
| Octagon | 75.0% | +13.6 | 0.238 | 16 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 68.2% | +6.8 | 0.481 | 22 · | |
| Open | 61.5% | +0.1 | 0.991 | 13 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 59.3% | -2.1 | 0.803 | 27 · | |
| Low fence | 55.6% | -5.8 | 0.711 | 9 · | |
| Rectangle | 47.6% | -13.8 | 0.164 | 21 · | |
| Half fence | 41.7% | -19.7 | 0.144 | 12 · | |
| Single wall | 38.5% | -22.9 | 0.076 | 13 · |
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 13.57 on 9 df, p 0.138
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 86.7%15 | +18.50.198 | +45.00.014 | +27.40.066 | +31.10.088 | +48.20.008 | -13.30.582 | +25.10.126 | +39.00.016 | +11.70.411 |
| Breakable full fence | -18.50.198 | 68.2%22 | +26.50.133 | +8.90.519 | +12.60.505 | +29.70.086 | -31.80.343 | +6.60.689 | +20.60.172 | -6.80.647 |
| Half fence | -45.00.014 | -26.50.133 | 41.7%12 | -17.60.309 | -13.90.528 | +3.20.870 | -58.30.127 | -19.90.320 | -6.00.741 | -33.30.074 |
| Breakable half fence | -27.40.066 | -8.90.519 | +17.60.309 | 59.3%27 | +3.70.845 | +20.80.217 | -40.70.252 | -2.30.890 | +11.60.422 | -15.70.295 |
| Low fence | -31.10.088 | -12.60.505 | +13.90.528 | -3.70.845 | 55.6%9 | +17.10.429 | -44.40.237 | -6.00.779 | +7.90.690 | -19.40.317 |
| Single wall | -48.20.008 | -29.70.086 | -3.20.870 | -20.80.217 | -17.10.429 | 38.5%13 | -61.50.104 | -23.10.239 | -9.20.601 | -36.50.047 |
| Fence and open | +13.30.582 | +31.80.343 | +58.30.127 | +40.70.252 | +44.40.237 | +61.50.104 | 100.0%2 | +38.50.283 | +52.40.156 | +25.00.423 |
| Open | -25.10.126 | -6.60.689 | +19.90.320 | +2.30.890 | +6.00.779 | +23.10.239 | -38.50.283 | 61.5%13 | +13.90.429 | -13.50.436 |
| Rectangle | -39.00.016 | -20.60.172 | +6.00.741 | -11.60.422 | -7.90.690 | +9.20.601 | -52.40.156 | -13.90.429 | 47.6%21 | -27.40.093 |
| Octagon | -11.70.411 | +6.80.647 | +33.30.074 | +15.70.295 | +19.40.317 | +36.50.047 | -25.00.423 | +13.50.436 | +27.40.093 | 75.0%16 |
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.