VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Jeffry

Jacky vs Jeffry in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 49.4% of 9,087 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 counted9,087
Win rate49.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.9 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
Single wall53.3%+3.90.011938
Half fence51.0%+1.60.315879
Open50.7%+1.30.387963
Rectangle50.2%+0.80.572996
Low fence49.4%+0.00.985897
Breakable half fence49.1%-0.30.853909
Octagon48.4%-0.90.559890
Fence and open47.8%-1.50.512437
Full fence47.8%-1.50.339870
Breakable full fence46.4%-3.00.057929
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 12.46 on 9 df, p 0.189

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.8%870+1.40.546-3.10.188-1.20.598-1.60.509-5.50.020-0.00.997-2.90.222-2.40.304-0.60.798
Breakable full fence-1.40.54646.4%929-4.60.052-2.70.252-3.00.201-6.90.003-1.40.621-4.30.063-3.80.095-2.00.385
Half fence+3.10.188+4.60.05251.0%879+1.90.421+1.60.505-2.30.319+3.10.283+0.30.900+0.80.741+2.50.285
Breakable half fence+1.20.598+2.70.252-1.90.42149.1%909-0.30.891-4.20.068+1.20.670-1.60.486-1.10.620+0.60.787
Low fence+1.60.509+3.00.201-1.60.505+0.30.89149.4%897-3.90.093+1.60.592-1.30.579-0.80.724+1.00.685
Single wall+5.50.020+6.90.003+2.30.319+4.20.068+3.90.09353.3%938+5.50.058+2.60.251+3.10.172+4.90.037
Fence and open+0.00.997+1.40.621-3.10.283-1.20.670-1.60.592-5.50.05847.8%437-2.80.323-2.40.408-0.60.837
Open+2.90.222+4.30.063-0.30.900+1.60.486+1.30.579-2.60.251+2.80.32350.7%963+0.50.834+2.20.334
Rectangle+2.40.304+3.80.095-0.80.741+1.10.620+0.80.724-3.10.172+2.40.408-0.50.83450.2%996+1.80.442
Octagon+0.60.798+2.00.385-2.50.285-0.60.787-1.00.685-4.90.037+0.60.837-2.20.334-1.80.44248.4%890
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 counted4,117
Win rate50.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches6.1 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
Single wall56.0%+6.10.008432
Fence and open51.6%+1.60.623225
Low fence51.6%+1.60.473448
Open51.2%+1.30.588400
Full fence50.6%+0.60.784415
Half fence48.7%-1.30.602382
Breakable half fence48.3%-1.70.473404
Rectangle48.2%-1.70.437456
Octagon47.7%-2.20.365375
Breakable full fence47.5%-2.50.285417
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 10.34 on 9 df, p 0.324

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.6%415+3.10.368+1.90.590+2.30.504-1.00.778-5.40.114-1.00.818-0.70.853+2.40.487+2.90.421
Breakable full fence-3.10.36847.5%417-1.20.733-0.80.822-4.10.230-8.50.013-4.10.325-3.80.282-0.80.822-0.20.944
Half fence-1.90.590+1.20.73348.7%382+0.40.905-2.90.410-7.30.037-2.90.495-2.60.474+0.40.898+1.00.792
Breakable half fence-2.30.504+0.80.822-0.40.90548.3%404-3.30.337-7.80.025-3.30.429-3.00.398+0.00.995+0.50.882
Low fence+1.00.778+4.10.230+2.90.410+3.30.33751.6%448-4.50.185+0.00.999+0.30.928+3.30.319+3.80.274
Single wall+5.40.114+8.50.013+7.30.037+7.80.025+4.50.18556.0%432+4.50.276+4.80.168+7.80.020+8.30.019
Fence and open+1.00.818+4.10.325+2.90.495+3.30.429-0.00.999-4.50.27651.6%225+0.30.942+3.30.416+3.80.365
Open+0.70.853+3.80.282+2.60.474+3.00.398-0.30.928-4.80.168-0.30.94251.2%400+3.00.380+3.50.328
Rectangle-2.40.487+0.80.822-0.40.898-0.00.995-3.30.319-7.80.020-3.30.416-3.00.38048.2%456+0.50.883
Octagon-2.90.421+0.20.944-1.00.792-0.50.882-3.80.274-8.30.019-3.80.365-3.50.328-0.50.88347.7%375
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 counted4,724
Win rate48.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.2 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
Half fence52.5%+4.20.056470
Rectangle51.2%+2.80.180506
Single wall50.4%+2.00.341488
Open49.8%+1.40.481530
Breakable half fence49.0%+0.60.788478
Octagon48.4%+0.00.999490
Low fence46.0%-2.40.304424
Full fence45.4%-3.00.185443
Breakable full fence45.1%-3.20.135485
Fence and open44.3%-4.10.236201
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 12.08 on 9 df, p 0.209

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence45.4%443+0.20.947-7.20.030-3.60.277-0.60.855-5.00.124+1.10.796-4.40.167-5.80.074-3.00.360
Breakable full fence-0.20.94745.1%485-7.40.022-3.80.238-0.80.801-5.30.101+0.90.834-4.70.138-6.00.058-3.20.315
Half fence+7.20.030+7.40.02252.5%470+3.60.268+6.60.050+2.10.507+8.30.050+2.70.387+1.40.669+4.20.195
Breakable half fence+3.60.277+3.80.238-3.60.26849.0%478+3.00.374-1.50.651+4.70.265-0.90.786-2.20.484+0.60.855
Low fence+0.60.855+0.80.801-6.60.050-3.00.37446.0%424-4.40.183+1.70.688-3.80.241-5.20.114-2.40.473
Single wall+5.00.124+5.30.101-2.10.507+1.50.651+4.40.18350.4%488+6.10.143+0.60.849-0.80.807+2.00.523
Fence and open-1.10.796-0.90.834-8.30.050-4.70.265-1.70.688-6.10.14344.3%201-5.50.181-6.90.098-4.10.328
Open+4.40.167+4.70.138-2.70.387+0.90.786+3.80.241-0.60.849+5.50.18149.8%530-1.40.658+1.40.645
Rectangle+5.80.074+6.00.058-1.40.669+2.20.484+5.20.114+0.80.807+6.90.098+1.40.65851.2%506+2.80.374
Octagon+3.00.360+3.20.315-4.20.195-0.60.855+2.40.473-2.00.523+4.10.328-1.40.645-2.80.37448.4%490
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 counted246
Win rate58.1%
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
Low fence68.0%+9.90.29125 ·
Single wall66.7%+8.50.44618 ·
Breakable half fence63.0%+4.80.59027 ·
Rectangle61.8%+3.60.64434 ·
Octagon60.0%+1.90.84225 ·
Open57.6%-0.60.94533 ·
Half fence55.6%-2.60.77427 ·
Breakable full fence51.9%-6.30.48327 ·
Full fence41.7%-16.50.23612 ·
Fence and open36.4%-21.80.13411 ·
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 6.01 on 9 df, p 0.739

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence41.7%12-10.20.557-13.90.423-21.30.216-26.30.127-25.00.176+5.30.795-15.90.344-20.10.227-18.30.295
Breakable full fence+10.20.55751.9%27-3.70.785-11.10.409-16.10.236-14.80.324+15.50.386-5.70.657-9.90.437-8.20.554
Half fence+13.90.423+3.70.78555.6%27-7.40.580-12.40.357-11.10.456+19.20.283-2.00.875-6.20.624-4.40.746
Breakable half fence+21.30.216+11.10.409+7.40.58063.0%27-5.00.703-3.70.799+26.60.135+5.40.672+1.20.924+3.00.826
Low fence+26.30.127+16.10.236+12.40.357+5.00.70368.0%25+1.30.927+31.60.076+10.40.418+6.20.621+8.00.556
Single wall+25.00.176+14.80.324+11.10.456+3.70.799-1.30.92766.7%18+30.30.111+9.10.525+4.90.727+6.70.655
Fence and open-5.30.795-15.50.386-19.20.283-26.60.135-31.60.076-30.30.11136.4%11-21.20.223-25.40.141-23.60.191
Open+15.90.344+5.70.657+2.00.875-5.40.672-10.40.418-9.10.525+21.20.22357.6%33-4.20.727-2.40.853
Rectangle+20.10.227+9.90.437+6.20.624-1.20.924-6.20.621-4.90.727+25.40.141+4.20.72761.8%34+1.80.891
Octagon+18.30.295+8.20.554+4.40.746-3.00.826-8.00.556-6.70.655+23.60.191+2.40.853-1.80.89160.0%25
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.