VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Lau

Jacky vs Lau in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 48.8% of 8,566 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 counted8,566
Win rate48.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.3 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
Fence and open53.1%+4.30.053480
Low fence51.1%+2.30.176784
Breakable half fence50.3%+1.40.370865
Breakable full fence49.9%+1.00.532824
Octagon49.8%+1.00.531899
Full fence48.2%-0.60.681919
Open47.7%-1.20.468858
Half fence47.1%-1.70.307800
Rectangle46.7%-2.20.194812
Single wall46.1%-2.80.084883
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 12.38 on 9 df, p 0.193

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.2%919-1.70.485+1.10.655-2.10.379-3.00.226+2.10.369-4.90.081+0.50.821+1.50.525-1.60.487
Breakable full fence+1.70.48549.9%824+2.80.267-0.40.866-1.30.611+3.80.118-3.20.258+2.20.365+3.20.195+0.10.985
Half fence-1.10.655-2.80.26747.1%800-3.20.197-4.00.109+1.00.672-6.00.038-0.60.825+0.50.856-2.70.265
Breakable half fence+2.10.379+0.40.866+3.20.19750.3%865-0.90.728+4.20.079-2.80.319+2.60.277+3.60.139+0.50.848
Low fence+3.00.226+1.30.611+4.00.109+0.90.72851.1%784+5.10.039-2.00.495+3.50.159+4.50.074+1.30.590
Single wall-2.10.369-3.80.118-1.00.672-4.20.079-5.10.03946.1%883-7.00.013-1.60.510-0.60.810-3.70.114
Fence and open+4.90.081+3.20.258+6.00.038+2.80.319+2.00.495+7.00.01353.1%480+5.50.056+6.50.025+3.30.244
Open-0.50.821-2.20.365+0.60.825-2.60.277-3.50.159+1.60.510-5.50.05647.7%858+1.00.684-2.20.364
Rectangle-1.50.525-3.20.195-0.50.856-3.60.139-4.50.074+0.60.810-6.50.025-1.00.68446.7%812-3.20.192
Octagon+1.60.487-0.10.985+2.70.265-0.50.848-1.30.590+3.70.114-3.30.244+2.20.364+3.20.19249.8%899
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 counted2,924
Win rate48.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-2.8 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
Octagon51.5%+2.80.331276
Full fence50.9%+2.30.389322
Breakable full fence50.9%+2.20.434277
Fence and open49.7%+1.10.771179
Single wall49.7%+1.00.697322
Low fence47.7%-1.00.739258
Open47.6%-1.10.694315
Half fence46.7%-2.00.490270
Rectangle46.5%-2.20.441286
Breakable half fence45.9%-2.80.302301
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 4.45 on 9 df, p 0.879

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.9%322+0.00.994+4.30.301+5.10.204+3.30.436+1.20.753+1.20.795+3.30.403+4.40.276-0.50.900
Breakable full fence-0.00.99450.9%277+4.20.322+5.00.224+3.20.456+1.20.767+1.20.805+3.30.425+4.40.296-0.60.898
Half fence-4.30.301-4.20.32246.7%270+0.80.845-1.00.817-3.00.464-3.00.526-0.90.818+0.20.969-4.80.264
Breakable half fence-5.10.204-5.00.224-0.80.84545.9%301-1.80.666-3.80.337-3.90.411-1.80.660-0.70.873-5.60.179
Low fence-3.30.436-3.20.456+1.00.817+1.80.66647.7%258-2.00.629-2.00.674+0.10.989+1.20.785-3.80.383
Single wall-1.20.753-1.20.767+3.00.464+3.80.337+2.00.62949.7%322-0.00.995+2.10.601+3.20.433-1.80.668
Fence and open-1.20.795-1.20.805+3.00.526+3.90.411+2.00.674+0.00.99549.7%179+2.10.653+3.20.499-1.70.719
Open-3.30.403-3.30.425+0.90.818+1.80.660-0.10.989-2.10.601-2.10.65347.6%315+1.10.784-3.80.353
Rectangle-4.40.276-4.40.296-0.20.969+0.70.873-1.20.785-3.20.433-3.20.499-1.10.78446.5%286-5.00.241
Octagon+0.50.900+0.60.898+4.80.264+5.60.179+3.80.383+1.80.668+1.70.719+3.80.353+5.00.24151.5%276
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 counted4,304
Win rate49.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-9.6 pts
Survive correction1
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 open55.1%+5.80.072225
Low fence54.2%+4.90.038406
Breakable half fence52.4%+3.10.169441
Breakable full fence51.7%+2.40.302414
Octagon49.8%+0.50.815472
Full fence49.5%+0.30.903446
Rectangle48.7%-0.50.822398
Half fence47.5%-1.80.438415
Open45.7%-3.60.117429
Single wall39.7%-9.6<0.001421
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 28.04 on 9 df, p <0.001

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.5%446-2.10.531+2.10.541-2.80.399-4.60.176+9.90.003-5.60.174+3.90.253+0.80.815-0.20.943
Breakable full fence+2.10.53151.7%414+4.20.224-0.70.840-2.50.474+12.0<0.001-3.40.408+6.00.081+3.00.401+1.90.572
Half fence-2.10.541-4.20.22447.5%415-4.90.151-6.70.054+7.80.023-7.60.065+1.80.604-1.30.716-2.30.491
Breakable half fence+2.80.399+0.70.840+4.90.15152.4%441-1.80.599+12.7<0.001-2.70.504+6.70.048+3.60.293+2.60.434
Low fence+4.60.176+2.50.474+6.70.054+1.80.59954.2%406+14.5<0.001-0.90.823+8.50.014+5.50.123+4.40.193
Single wall-9.90.003-12.0<0.001-7.80.023-12.7<0.001-14.5<0.00139.7%421-15.4<0.001-6.00.076-9.10.009-10.10.002
Fence and open+5.60.174+3.40.408+7.60.065+2.70.504+0.90.823+15.4<0.00155.1%225+9.40.022+6.40.127+5.30.189
Open-3.90.253-6.00.081-1.80.604-6.70.048-8.50.014+6.00.076-9.40.02245.7%429-3.00.379-4.10.218
Rectangle-0.80.815-3.00.401+1.30.716-3.60.293-5.50.123+9.10.009-6.40.127+3.00.37948.7%398-1.10.759
Octagon+0.20.943-1.90.572+2.30.491-2.60.434-4.40.193+10.10.002-5.30.189+4.10.218+1.10.75949.8%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 counted1,338
Win rate47.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-9.4 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 wall57.1%+9.30.020140
Fence and open55.3%+7.40.18276 ·
Open55.3%+7.40.097114
Breakable half fence53.7%+5.80.175123
Low fence48.3%+0.50.908120
Octagon47.0%-0.80.832151
Half fence47.0%-0.90.844115
Breakable full fence42.1%-5.70.164133
Rectangle40.6%-7.20.086128
Full fence38.4%-9.40.014151
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 20.60 on 9 df, p 0.015

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence38.4%151-3.70.526-8.60.162-15.20.012-9.90.101-18.70.001-16.90.016-16.90.006-2.20.706-8.60.130
Breakable full fence+3.70.52642.1%133-4.80.443-11.60.064-6.20.320-15.00.013-13.20.067-13.20.039+1.50.808-4.90.406
Half fence+8.60.162+4.80.44347.0%115-6.70.301-1.40.833-10.20.105-8.30.261-8.30.209+6.30.320-0.10.992
Breakable half fence+15.20.012+11.60.064+6.70.30153.7%123+5.30.406-3.50.570-1.60.825-1.60.804+13.00.039+6.60.274
Low fence+9.90.101+6.20.320+1.40.833-5.30.40648.3%120-8.80.156-6.90.344-6.90.289+7.70.222+1.30.830
Single wall+18.70.001+15.00.013+10.20.105+3.50.570+8.80.15657.1%140+1.90.790+1.90.764+16.50.007+10.10.084
Fence and open+16.90.016+13.20.067+8.30.261+1.60.825+6.90.344-1.90.79055.3%76+0.01.000+14.60.043+8.20.241
Open+16.90.006+13.20.039+8.30.209+1.60.804+6.90.289-1.90.764-0.01.00055.3%114+14.60.023+8.20.184
Rectangle+2.20.706-1.50.808-6.30.320-13.00.039-7.70.222-16.50.007-14.60.043-14.60.02340.6%128-6.40.284
Octagon+8.60.130+4.90.406+0.10.992-6.60.274-1.30.830-10.10.084-8.20.241-8.20.184+6.40.28447.0%151
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.