VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Lion

Jacky vs Lion in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 50.7% of 7,865 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 counted7,865
Win rate50.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.8 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
Low fence54.1%+3.40.055717
Fence and open53.8%+3.10.220366
Octagon53.5%+2.90.082831
Full fence52.8%+2.10.187846
Rectangle50.5%-0.20.897832
Breakable full fence50.2%-0.50.753837
Half fence49.9%-0.80.637736
Breakable half fence49.7%-1.00.551781
Open47.8%-2.90.094737
Single wall46.9%-3.80.025799
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 16.72 on 9 df, p 0.053

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.8%846+2.70.275+3.00.238+3.20.203-1.30.614+5.90.017-1.00.752+5.10.044+2.40.334-0.70.770
Breakable full fence-2.70.27550.2%837+0.30.901+0.50.841-3.90.122+3.20.189-3.60.244+2.40.338-0.30.902-3.40.168
Half fence-3.00.238-0.30.90149.9%736+0.20.943-4.20.105+2.90.251-4.00.215+2.10.419-0.60.807-3.70.145
Breakable half fence-3.20.203-0.50.841-0.20.94349.7%781-4.40.086+2.80.275-4.20.191+1.90.455-0.80.748-3.90.120
Low fence+1.30.614+3.90.122+4.20.105+4.40.08654.1%717+7.20.005+0.30.928+6.30.015+3.60.153+0.60.824
Single wall-5.90.017-3.20.189-2.90.251-2.80.275-7.20.00546.9%799-6.90.029-0.80.746-3.50.152-6.60.008
Fence and open+1.00.752+3.60.244+4.00.215+4.20.191-0.30.928+6.90.02953.8%366+6.10.058+3.40.286+0.30.930
Open-5.10.044-2.40.338-2.10.419-1.90.455-6.30.015+0.80.746-6.10.05847.8%737-2.70.282-5.80.022
Rectangle-2.40.334+0.30.902+0.60.807+0.80.748-3.60.153+3.50.152-3.40.286+2.70.28250.5%832-3.10.210
Octagon+0.70.770+3.40.168+3.70.145+3.90.120-0.60.824+6.60.008-0.30.930+5.80.022+3.10.21053.5%831
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 counted3,046
Win rate50.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-4.1 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
Full fence54.9%+4.00.149295
Octagon53.0%+2.10.392364
Low fence52.4%+1.50.592290
Open50.7%-0.20.951270
Fence and open50.7%-0.20.960140
Rectangle50.5%-0.40.885291
Half fence50.5%-0.40.879299
Breakable full fence50.1%-0.80.769327
Breakable half fence48.5%-2.50.376291
Single wall46.9%-4.10.115333
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 5.82 on 9 df, p 0.758

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.9%295+4.80.235+4.40.281+6.50.118+2.50.544+8.10.044+4.20.412+4.20.321+4.40.286+1.90.628
Breakable full fence-4.80.23550.1%327-0.30.931+1.70.673-2.30.575+3.30.395-0.60.911-0.60.886-0.40.928-2.90.451
Half fence-4.40.281+0.30.93150.5%299+2.00.619-1.90.643+3.60.359-0.20.967-0.20.955-0.00.997-2.50.518
Breakable half fence-6.50.118-1.70.673-2.00.61948.5%291-4.00.340+1.60.688-2.30.660-2.30.588-2.10.619-4.60.245
Low fence-2.50.544+2.30.575+1.90.643+4.00.34052.4%290+5.60.166+1.70.741+1.70.692+1.90.647-0.60.877
Single wall-8.10.044-3.30.395-3.60.359-1.60.688-5.60.16646.9%333-3.90.442-3.90.341-3.70.360-6.20.103
Fence and open-4.20.412+0.60.911+0.20.967+2.30.660-1.70.741+3.90.44250.7%140-0.00.996+0.20.969-2.30.642
Open-4.20.321+0.60.886+0.20.955+2.30.588-1.70.692+3.90.341+0.00.99650.7%270+0.20.957-2.30.570
Rectangle-4.40.286+0.40.928+0.00.997+2.10.619-1.90.647+3.70.360-0.20.969-0.20.95750.5%291-2.50.523
Octagon-1.90.628+2.90.451+2.50.518+4.60.245+0.60.877+6.20.103+2.30.642+2.30.570+2.50.52353.0%364
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 counted3,897
Win rate48.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches5.1 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
Octagon53.9%+5.10.035384
Low fence53.0%+4.20.100351
Fence and open52.2%+3.40.348180
Rectangle49.9%+1.10.629443
Breakable half fence49.8%+0.90.689402
Full fence49.1%+0.30.910428
Breakable full fence47.6%-1.20.604418
Half fence47.4%-1.40.589350
Open45.0%-3.80.126373
Single wall44.1%-4.70.056374
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 13.49 on 9 df, p 0.142

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.1%428+1.50.671+1.60.649-0.70.843-3.90.275+5.00.161-3.10.477+4.00.255-0.80.808-4.80.168
Breakable full fence-1.50.67147.6%418+0.20.961-2.10.539-5.40.137+3.50.325-4.60.300+2.60.470-2.30.504-6.30.075
Half fence-1.60.649-0.20.96147.4%350-2.30.525-5.60.141+3.30.371-4.80.296+2.40.520-2.50.492-6.50.080
Breakable half fence+0.70.843+2.10.539+2.30.52549.8%402-3.20.375+5.60.116-2.50.582+4.70.189-0.10.969-4.20.244
Low fence+3.90.275+5.40.137+5.60.141+3.20.37553.0%351+8.90.017+0.80.867+8.00.032+3.10.385-0.90.804
Single wall-5.00.161-3.50.325-3.30.371-5.60.116-8.90.01744.1%374-8.10.073-0.90.800-5.80.100-9.80.007
Fence and open+3.10.477+4.60.300+4.80.296+2.50.582-0.80.867+8.10.07352.2%180+7.20.113+2.30.597-1.70.709
Open-4.00.255-2.60.470-2.40.520-4.70.189-8.00.032+0.90.800-7.20.11345.0%373-4.80.167-8.90.015
Rectangle+0.80.808+2.30.504+2.50.492+0.10.969-3.10.385+5.80.100-2.30.597+4.80.16749.9%443-4.00.249
Octagon+4.80.168+6.30.075+6.50.080+4.20.244+0.90.804+9.80.007+1.70.709+8.90.015+4.00.24953.9%384
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 counted922
Win rate57.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-7.9 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
Fence and open69.6%+11.70.10146 ·
Low fence65.8%+7.90.14776 ·
Breakable full fence62.0%+4.00.40892
Full fence61.0%+3.10.461123
Single wall58.7%+0.80.87392
Half fence57.5%-0.50.92987
Octagon54.2%-3.70.47483
Breakable half fence53.4%-4.50.36888
Rectangle53.1%-4.90.30398
Open50.0%-7.90.10194
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 10.18 on 9 df, p 0.336

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence61.0%123-1.00.884+3.50.610+7.60.272-4.80.495+2.30.736-8.60.302+11.00.106+7.90.237+6.80.335
Breakable full fence+1.00.88462.0%92+4.50.541+8.60.246-3.80.607+3.30.651-7.60.379+12.00.101+8.90.215+7.70.300
Half fence-3.50.610-4.50.54157.5%87+4.10.589-8.30.277-1.20.868-12.10.172+7.50.314+4.40.547+3.20.669
Breakable half fence-7.60.272-8.60.246-4.10.58953.4%88-12.40.108-5.30.475-16.20.071+3.40.646+0.30.962-0.80.916
Low fence+4.80.495+3.80.607+8.30.277+12.40.10865.8%76+7.10.346-3.80.667+15.80.039+12.70.091+11.60.137
Single wall-2.30.736-3.30.651+1.20.868+5.30.475-7.10.34658.7%92-10.90.214+8.70.234+5.60.434+4.50.551
Fence and open+8.60.302+7.60.379+12.10.172+16.20.071+3.80.667+10.90.21469.6%46+19.60.028+16.50.061+15.30.089
Open-11.00.106-12.00.101-7.50.314-3.40.646-15.80.039-8.70.234-19.60.02850.0%94-3.10.671-4.20.575
Rectangle-7.90.237-8.90.215-4.40.547-0.30.962-12.70.091-5.60.434-16.50.061+3.10.67153.1%98-1.20.877
Octagon-6.80.335-7.70.300-3.20.669+0.80.916-11.60.137-4.50.551-15.30.089+4.20.575+1.20.87754.2%83
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.