VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Kage

Jacky vs Kage in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 48.1% of 8,788 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 counted8,788
Win rate48.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-2.7 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
Octagon50.2%+2.10.194854
Full fence50.1%+2.00.201926
Half fence50.1%+1.90.242823
Open49.1%+1.00.549804
Rectangle48.3%+0.10.934860
Single wall48.0%-0.10.953966
Fence and open47.3%-0.80.718442
Breakable half fence46.8%-1.30.402908
Breakable full fence46.5%-1.60.319898
Low fence45.4%-2.70.084903
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 8.86 on 9 df, p 0.450

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.1%926+3.60.128+0.10.984+3.30.157+4.70.044+2.10.367+2.80.329+1.00.685+1.90.434-0.10.958
Breakable full fence-3.60.12846.5%898-3.50.145-0.30.912+1.10.626-1.50.521-0.70.799-2.60.287-1.70.473-3.70.123
Half fence-0.10.984+3.50.14550.1%823+3.20.176+4.70.053+2.00.393+2.80.346+0.90.707+1.80.459-0.20.943
Breakable half fence-3.30.157+0.30.912-3.20.17646.8%908+1.40.550-1.20.595-0.50.869-2.30.337-1.40.542-3.40.150
Low fence-4.70.044-1.10.626-4.70.053-1.40.55045.4%903-2.60.255-1.90.516-3.70.124-2.90.230-4.80.043
Single wall-2.10.367+1.50.521-2.00.393+1.20.595+2.60.25548.0%966+0.70.794-1.10.646-0.20.924-2.20.349
Fence and open-2.80.329+0.70.799-2.80.346+0.50.869+1.90.516-0.70.79447.3%442-1.80.533-1.00.740-2.90.314
Open-1.00.685+2.60.287-0.90.707+2.30.337+3.70.124+1.10.646+1.80.53349.1%804+0.90.722-1.10.653
Rectangle-1.90.434+1.70.473-1.80.459+1.40.542+2.90.230+0.20.924+1.00.740-0.90.72248.3%860-2.00.413
Octagon+0.10.958+3.70.123+0.20.943+3.40.150+4.80.043+2.20.349+2.90.314+1.10.653+2.00.41350.2%854
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 counted2,905
Win rate49.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches6.9 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
Full fence56.5%+6.90.008329
Half fence53.2%+3.50.215284
Octagon52.0%+2.40.415271
Single wall50.2%+0.50.858287
Rectangle49.7%+0.01.000306
Breakable half fence49.1%-0.60.821328
Open48.4%-1.30.667242
Breakable full fence47.4%-2.30.428264
Low fence44.1%-5.60.036313
Fence and open43.4%-6.30.121143
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 15.18 on 9 df, p 0.086

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence56.5%329+9.20.026+3.40.404+7.40.056+12.40.002+6.40.114+13.20.008+8.20.053+6.90.083+4.50.270
Breakable full fence-9.20.02647.4%264-5.80.173-1.70.674+3.30.434-2.80.507+4.00.440-1.00.822-2.30.580-4.70.279
Half fence-3.40.404+5.80.17353.2%284+4.10.314+9.10.027+3.00.474+9.80.056+4.80.270+3.50.396+1.10.788
Breakable half fence-7.40.056+1.70.674-4.10.31449.1%328+5.00.205-1.10.788+5.70.252+0.70.862-0.60.882-2.90.473
Low fence-12.40.002-3.30.434-9.10.027-5.00.20544.1%313-6.10.136+0.70.884-4.30.318-5.60.164-7.90.055
Single wall-6.40.114+2.80.507-3.00.474+1.10.788+6.10.13650.2%287+6.80.182+1.80.675+0.50.903-1.90.661
Fence and open-13.20.008-4.00.440-9.80.056-5.70.252-0.70.884-6.80.18243.4%143-5.00.343-6.30.212-8.70.093
Open-8.20.053+1.00.822-4.80.270-0.70.862+4.30.318-1.80.675+5.00.34348.4%242-1.30.758-3.70.405
Rectangle-6.90.083+2.30.580-3.50.396+0.60.882+5.60.164-0.50.903+6.30.212+1.30.75849.7%306-2.40.572
Octagon-4.50.270+4.70.279-1.10.788+2.90.473+7.90.055+1.90.661+8.70.093+3.70.405+2.40.57252.0%271
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 counted4,788
Win rate46.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches1.5 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
Open48.4%+1.50.496473
Octagon48.1%+1.20.593453
Fence and open47.8%+0.90.774251
Rectangle47.6%+0.70.752445
Half fence47.5%+0.60.810436
Full fence47.4%+0.40.837494
Single wall46.4%-0.50.796558
Breakable full fence46.3%-0.60.763514
Breakable half fence45.9%-1.00.639477
Low fence45.9%-1.10.617482
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 1.47 on 9 df, p 0.997

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.4%494+1.10.735-0.10.974+1.50.649+1.50.635+0.90.757-0.40.909-1.00.745-0.30.934-0.80.816
Breakable full fence-1.10.73546.3%514-1.20.718+0.40.902+0.50.886-0.10.971-1.50.695-2.10.507-1.30.679-1.80.572
Half fence+0.10.974+1.20.71847.5%436+1.60.636+1.60.622+1.10.739-0.30.933-0.90.777-0.20.961-0.60.847
Breakable half fence-1.50.649-0.40.902-1.60.63645.9%477+0.10.985-0.50.871-1.90.626-2.50.440-1.70.599-2.20.499
Low fence-1.50.635-0.50.886-1.60.622-0.10.98545.9%482-0.60.855-2.00.614-2.60.427-1.80.585-2.30.486
Single wall-0.90.757+0.10.971-1.10.739+0.50.871+0.60.85546.4%558-1.40.713-2.00.522-1.20.699-1.70.589
Fence and open+0.40.909+1.50.695+0.30.933+1.90.626+2.00.614+1.40.71347.8%251-0.60.877+0.20.966-0.30.936
Open+1.00.745+2.10.507+0.90.777+2.50.440+2.60.427+2.00.522+0.60.87748.4%473+0.80.815+0.30.929
Rectangle+0.30.934+1.30.679+0.20.961+1.70.599+1.80.585+1.20.699-0.20.966-0.80.81547.6%445-0.50.885
Octagon+0.80.816+1.80.572+0.60.847+2.20.499+2.30.486+1.70.589+0.30.936-0.30.929+0.50.88548.1%453
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 counted1,095
Win rate49.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-6.5 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
Fence and open56.2%+7.00.31948 ·
Open55.1%+5.80.25189
Octagon53.9%+4.60.261130
Half fence52.4%+3.20.494103
Single wall50.4%+1.20.781121
Low fence47.2%-2.00.661108
Rectangle46.8%-2.40.592109
Breakable full fence45.8%-3.40.431120
Breakable half fence43.7%-5.50.238103
Full fence42.7%-6.50.165103
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: 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 7.74 on 9 df, p 0.561

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence42.7%103-3.10.641-9.70.163-1.00.888-4.50.511-7.70.250-13.50.121-12.30.088-4.10.551-11.10.092
Breakable full fence+3.10.64145.8%120-6.60.326+2.10.748-1.40.834-4.60.477-10.40.222-9.20.187-1.00.885-8.00.206
Half fence+9.70.163+6.60.32652.4%103+8.70.209+5.20.450+2.00.764-3.80.661-2.60.716+5.60.412-1.40.829
Breakable half fence+1.00.888-2.10.748-8.70.20943.7%103-3.50.606-6.70.315-12.60.150-11.40.116-3.10.650-10.20.124
Low fence+4.50.511+1.40.834-5.20.450+3.50.60647.2%108-3.20.630-9.00.298-7.80.274+0.40.949-6.60.309
Single wall+7.70.250+4.60.477-2.00.764+6.70.315+3.20.63050.4%121-5.80.493-4.70.506+3.60.583-3.40.586
Fence and open+13.50.121+10.40.222+3.80.661+12.60.150+9.00.298+5.80.49356.2%48+1.20.893+9.50.275+2.40.775
Open+12.30.088+9.20.187+2.60.716+11.40.116+7.80.274+4.70.506-1.20.89355.1%89+8.30.247+1.20.860
Rectangle+4.10.551+1.00.885-5.60.412+3.10.650-0.40.949-3.60.583-9.50.275-8.30.24746.8%109-7.10.277
Octagon+11.10.092+8.00.206+1.40.829+10.20.124+6.60.309+3.40.586-2.40.775-1.20.860+7.10.27753.9%130
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.