VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Jean

Jacky vs Jean in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 48.4% of 7,434 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 counted7,434
Win rate48.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-2.3 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Jacky's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Half fence49.9%+1.60.387679
Breakable half fence49.8%+1.40.448649
Rectangle49.6%+1.20.488714
Octagon49.5%+1.20.479775
Breakable full fence49.3%+0.90.579814
Single wall47.8%-0.50.766709
Low fence47.7%-0.60.714767
Full fence47.5%-0.80.619806
Fence and open46.1%-2.30.378356
Open46.0%-2.30.169778
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 5.21 on 9 df, p 0.816

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.5%806-1.70.482-2.40.355-2.20.393-0.20.937-0.30.909+1.40.648+1.50.549-2.10.422-2.00.420
Breakable full fence+1.70.48249.3%814-0.70.798-0.50.848+1.50.539+1.40.572+3.20.314+3.20.195-0.30.902-0.30.909
Half fence+2.40.355+0.70.79849.9%679+0.20.954+2.20.402+2.10.431+3.90.238+3.90.136+0.30.897+0.40.886
Breakable half fence+2.20.393+0.50.848-0.20.95449.8%649+2.00.442+2.00.472+3.70.261+3.80.157+0.20.944+0.20.934
Low fence+0.20.937-1.50.539-2.20.402-2.00.44247.7%767-0.10.971+1.60.606+1.70.502-1.90.474-1.80.472
Single wall+0.30.909-1.40.572-2.10.431-2.00.472+0.10.97147.8%709+1.70.590+1.80.488-1.80.505-1.70.504
Fence and open-1.40.648-3.20.314-3.90.238-3.70.261-1.60.606-1.70.59046.1%356+0.10.987-3.50.279-3.50.277
Open-1.50.549-3.20.195-3.90.136-3.80.157-1.70.502-1.80.488-0.10.98746.0%778-3.60.169-3.50.163
Rectangle+2.10.422+0.30.902-0.30.897-0.20.944+1.90.474+1.80.505+3.50.279+3.60.16949.6%714+0.00.990
Octagon+2.00.420+0.30.909-0.40.886-0.20.934+1.80.472+1.70.504+3.50.277+3.50.163-0.00.99049.5%775
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 counted2,755
Win rate46.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-4.2 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Jacky's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable half fence49.0%+2.90.335257
Open48.7%+2.60.370275
Half fence48.0%+1.80.543250
Fence and open47.1%+1.00.823123
Rectangle46.9%+0.70.788320
Octagon46.7%+0.60.849274
Single wall46.7%+0.60.861229
Breakable full fence46.7%+0.50.863270
Full fence44.0%-2.10.431302
Low fence42.0%-4.20.115312
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: 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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 4.77 on 9 df, p 0.854

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence44.0%302-2.60.529-4.00.353-5.00.239+2.00.608-2.70.538-3.10.558-4.70.259-2.80.478-2.70.519
Breakable full fence+2.60.52946.7%270-1.30.761-2.40.588+4.70.257-0.10.990-0.50.928-2.10.630-0.20.960-0.10.991
Half fence+4.00.353+1.30.76148.0%250-1.00.817+6.00.154+1.30.780+0.80.878-0.70.868+1.10.790+1.30.769
Breakable half fence+5.00.239+2.40.588+1.00.81749.0%257+7.00.093+2.30.612+1.90.733+0.30.945+2.10.607+2.30.594
Low fence-2.00.608-4.70.257-6.00.154-7.00.09342.0%312-4.70.273-5.20.328-6.70.102-4.90.216-4.70.250
Single wall+2.70.538+0.10.990-1.30.780-2.30.612+4.70.27346.7%229-0.40.939-2.00.654-0.20.972+0.00.998
Fence and open+3.10.558+0.50.928-0.80.878-1.90.733+5.20.328+0.40.93947.1%123-1.60.772+0.30.958+0.40.935
Open+4.70.259+2.10.630+0.70.868-0.30.945+6.70.102+2.00.654+1.60.77248.7%275+1.90.652+2.00.637
Rectangle+2.80.478+0.20.960-1.10.790-2.10.607+4.90.216+0.20.972-0.30.958-1.90.65246.9%320+0.20.969
Octagon+2.70.519+0.10.991-1.30.769-2.30.594+4.70.250-0.00.998-0.40.935-2.00.637-0.20.96946.7%274
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 counted4,427
Win rate49.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.5 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Jacky's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Octagon52.1%+2.60.223472
Low fence51.8%+2.40.298434
Rectangle51.5%+2.00.419377
Half fence50.9%+1.40.556407
Single wall49.8%+0.30.892444
Breakable full fence49.6%+0.10.946512
Breakable half fence49.3%-0.10.954371
Full fence49.1%-0.40.850479
Fence and open44.5%-5.00.124227
Open44.0%-5.50.011471
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: 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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 11.26 on 9 df, p 0.258

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.1%479-0.60.863-1.80.593-0.30.939-2.80.401-0.70.828+4.60.256+5.10.114-2.40.486-3.10.346
Breakable full fence+0.60.86349.6%512-1.20.706+0.30.934-2.20.493-0.20.959+5.10.199+5.70.076-1.90.586-2.50.432
Half fence+1.80.593+1.20.70650.9%407+1.50.669-1.00.776+1.10.752+6.40.124+6.90.041-0.60.867-1.30.710
Breakable half fence+0.30.939-0.30.934-1.50.66949.3%371-2.50.476-0.40.898+4.80.251+5.40.120-2.10.560-2.80.421
Low fence+2.80.401+2.20.493+1.00.776+2.50.47651.8%434+2.10.540+7.30.073+7.90.018+0.40.913-0.30.934
Single wall+0.70.828+0.20.959-1.10.752+0.40.898-2.10.54049.8%444+5.30.195+5.80.078-1.70.631-2.40.478
Fence and open-4.60.256-5.10.199-6.40.124-4.80.251-7.30.073-5.30.19544.5%227+0.50.892-7.00.097-7.60.059
Open-5.10.114-5.70.076-6.90.041-5.40.120-7.90.018-5.80.078-0.50.89244.0%471-7.50.030-8.20.012
Rectangle+2.40.486+1.90.586+0.60.867+2.10.560-0.40.913+1.70.631+7.00.097+7.50.03051.5%377-0.70.848
Octagon+3.10.346+2.50.432+1.30.710+2.80.421+0.30.934+2.40.478+7.60.059+8.20.012+0.70.84852.1%472
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 counted252
Win rate52.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Jacky's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open83.3%+30.90.1246 ·
Breakable half fence66.7%+14.30.17121 ·
Breakable full fence65.6%+13.20.10832 ·
Full fence60.0%+7.60.42225 ·
Rectangle58.8%+6.40.58217 ·
Half fence54.5%+2.20.83122 ·
Open53.1%+0.70.92832 ·
Low fence47.6%-4.80.64821 ·
Octagon34.5%-17.90.04029 ·
Single wall30.6%-21.80.00536 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 17.93 on 9 df, p 0.036

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence60.0%25-5.60.662+5.50.706-6.70.641+12.40.401+29.40.022-23.30.283+6.90.604+1.20.939+25.50.061
Breakable full fence+5.60.66265.6%32+11.10.412-1.10.938+18.00.193+35.10.004-17.70.392+12.50.309+6.80.638+31.10.015
Half fence-5.50.706-11.10.41254.5%22-12.10.416+6.90.650+24.00.070-28.80.201+1.40.918-4.30.789+20.10.152
Breakable half fence+6.70.641+1.10.938+12.10.41666.7%21+19.10.212+36.10.008-16.70.430+13.60.328+7.80.618+32.20.025
Low fence-12.40.401-18.00.193-6.90.650-19.10.21247.6%21+17.10.198-35.70.121-5.50.695-11.20.492+13.10.349
Single wall-29.40.022-35.10.004-24.00.070-36.10.008-17.10.19830.6%36-52.80.014-22.60.059-28.30.050-3.90.736
Fence and open+23.30.283+17.70.392+28.80.201+16.70.430+35.70.121+52.80.01483.3%6+30.20.169+24.50.278+48.90.028
Open-6.90.604-12.50.309-1.40.918-13.60.328+5.50.695+22.60.059-30.20.16953.1%32-5.70.703+18.60.143
Rectangle-1.20.939-6.80.638+4.30.789-7.80.618+11.20.492+28.30.050-24.50.278+5.70.70358.8%17+24.30.108
Octagon-25.50.061-31.10.015-20.10.152-32.20.025-13.10.349+3.90.736-48.90.028-18.60.143-24.30.10834.5%29
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.