VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Pai

Jacky vs Pai in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 51.4% of 9,013 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 counted9,013
Win rate51.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches2.4 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
Full fence53.7%+2.40.122953
Fence and open52.5%+1.20.604451
Half fence52.4%+1.00.516901
Low fence52.4%+1.00.500964
Octagon51.9%+0.50.736867
Breakable half fence51.8%+0.50.766934
Breakable full fence51.6%+0.30.861953
Open50.5%-0.90.583856
Single wall50.3%-1.10.520835
Rectangle49.2%-2.10.195833
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 5.29 on 9 df, p 0.809

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence53.7%953+2.10.359+1.30.564+1.90.407+1.30.557+3.40.148+1.20.680+3.30.166+4.50.057+1.80.437
Breakable full fence-2.10.35951.6%953-0.80.743-0.20.933-0.80.739+1.30.575-0.90.746+1.20.622+2.40.310-0.30.906
Half fence-1.30.564+0.80.74352.4%901+0.60.808+0.01.000+2.10.385-0.20.955+1.90.421+3.20.188+0.50.839
Breakable half fence-1.90.407+0.20.933-0.60.80851.8%934-0.60.805+1.50.523-0.70.799+1.40.567+2.60.275-0.10.972
Low fence-1.30.557+0.80.739-0.01.000+0.60.80552.4%964+2.10.377-0.20.954+1.90.414+3.20.181+0.50.836
Single wall-3.40.148-1.30.575-2.10.385-1.50.523-2.10.37750.3%835-2.20.441-0.20.945+1.10.659-1.60.508
Fence and open-1.20.680+0.90.746+0.20.955+0.70.799+0.20.954+2.20.44152.5%451+2.10.474+3.30.255+0.70.824
Open-3.30.166-1.20.622-1.90.421-1.40.567-1.90.414+0.20.945-2.10.47450.5%856+1.20.608-1.40.551
Rectangle-4.50.057-2.40.310-3.20.188-2.60.275-3.20.181-1.10.659-3.30.255-1.20.60849.2%833-2.70.269
Octagon-1.80.437+0.30.906-0.50.839+0.10.972-0.50.836+1.60.508-0.70.824+1.40.551+2.70.26951.9%867
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 counted4,678
Win rate51.4%
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
Half fence55.4%+3.90.066486
Full fence55.2%+3.80.074487
Breakable full fence53.5%+2.00.355464
Low fence52.7%+1.30.538497
Breakable half fence51.7%+0.30.897505
Rectangle50.7%-0.70.761424
Octagon50.4%-1.00.662456
Fence and open50.4%-1.00.746246
Open50.0%-1.40.547414
Single wall50.0%-1.40.538432
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 7.03 on 9 df, p 0.634

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.2%487+1.80.580-0.10.972+3.60.262+2.50.428+5.20.113+4.80.216+5.20.117+4.50.172+4.80.140
Breakable full fence-1.80.58053.5%464-1.90.556+1.80.583+0.70.820+3.50.302+3.00.440+3.50.307+2.70.414+3.00.361
Half fence+0.10.972+1.90.55655.4%486+3.70.247+2.60.407+5.30.105+4.90.205+5.30.109+4.60.162+4.90.131
Breakable half fence-3.60.262-1.80.583-3.70.24751.7%505-1.00.743+1.70.607+1.30.743+1.70.612+1.00.767+1.20.700
Low fence-2.50.428-0.70.820-2.60.407+1.00.74352.7%497+2.70.409+2.30.553+2.70.414+2.00.543+2.30.482
Single wall-5.20.113-3.50.302-5.30.105-1.70.607-2.70.40950.0%432-0.40.919+0.01.000-0.70.836-0.40.896
Fence and open-4.80.216-3.00.440-4.90.205-1.30.743-2.30.553+0.40.91950.4%246+0.40.920-0.30.940-0.00.994
Open-5.20.117-3.50.307-5.30.109-1.70.612-2.70.414-0.01.000-0.40.92050.0%414-0.70.838-0.40.897
Rectangle-4.50.172-2.70.414-4.60.162-1.00.767-2.00.543+0.70.836+0.30.940+0.70.83850.7%424+0.30.936
Octagon-4.80.140-3.00.361-4.90.131-1.20.700-2.30.482+0.40.896+0.00.994+0.40.897-0.30.93650.4%456
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 counted3,882
Win rate50.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.8 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
Fence and open54.7%+3.80.278190
Octagon53.2%+2.30.346372
Full fence51.6%+0.70.763403
Low fence51.6%+0.70.776417
Breakable half fence50.9%+0.00.998391
Open50.9%-0.00.989403
Single wall50.5%-0.30.886366
Breakable full fence49.5%-1.40.547434
Rectangle48.0%-2.90.236367
Half fence47.8%-3.10.213360
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 5.03 on 9 df, p 0.832

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.6%403+2.10.549+3.80.290+0.70.840+0.10.988+1.10.768-3.10.477+0.70.833+3.60.311-1.60.653
Breakable full fence-2.10.54949.5%434+1.80.621-1.40.697-2.00.556-1.00.777-5.20.232-1.30.701+1.60.655-3.70.297
Half fence-3.80.290-1.80.62147.8%360-3.10.393-3.80.293-2.80.456-7.00.121-3.10.394-0.20.962-5.50.141
Breakable half fence-0.70.840+1.40.697+3.10.39350.9%391-0.70.850+0.30.924-3.80.385+0.00.994+2.90.419-2.30.519
Low fence-0.10.988+2.00.556+3.80.293+0.70.85051.6%417+1.00.777-3.20.467+0.70.843+3.60.314-1.70.640
Single wall-1.10.768+1.00.777+2.80.456-0.30.924-1.00.77750.5%366-4.20.348-0.30.929+2.60.483-2.70.466
Fence and open+3.10.477+5.20.232+7.00.121+3.80.385+3.20.467+4.20.34854.7%190+3.90.379+6.80.129+1.50.734
Open-0.70.833+1.30.701+3.10.394-0.00.994-0.70.843+0.30.929-3.90.37950.9%403+2.90.420-2.40.512
Rectangle-3.60.311-1.60.655+0.20.962-2.90.419-3.60.314-2.60.483-6.80.129-2.90.42048.0%367-5.30.152
Octagon+1.60.653+3.70.297+5.50.141+2.30.519+1.70.640+2.70.466-1.50.734+2.40.512+5.30.15253.2%372
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 counted453
Win rate54.8%
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
Breakable half fence63.2%+8.40.27638 ·
Fence and open60.0%+5.20.67815 ·
Octagon56.4%+1.70.82739 ·
Half fence56.4%+1.60.79755 ·
Low fence56.0%+1.20.85050 ·
Full fence55.6%+0.80.88963 ·
Breakable full fence52.7%-2.00.74855 ·
Single wall51.4%-3.40.66537 ·
Open51.3%-3.50.64939 ·
Rectangle45.2%-9.50.19442 ·
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 3.37 on 9 df, p 0.948

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.6%63+2.80.758-0.80.930-7.60.453-0.40.962+4.20.684-4.40.755+4.30.674+10.30.300-0.80.933
Breakable full fence-2.80.75852.7%55-3.60.702-10.40.318-3.30.737+1.40.897-7.30.616+1.40.890+7.50.465-3.70.724
Half fence+0.80.930+3.60.70256.4%55-6.80.512+0.40.970+5.00.636-3.60.801+5.10.626+11.10.277-0.10.996
Breakable half fence+7.60.453+10.40.318+6.80.51263.2%38+7.20.499+11.80.301+3.20.831+11.90.292+17.90.108+6.80.546
Low fence+0.40.962+3.30.737-0.40.970-7.20.49956.0%50+4.70.667-4.00.784+4.70.658+10.80.304-0.40.969
Single wall-4.20.684-1.40.897-5.00.636-11.80.301-4.70.66751.4%37-8.70.571+0.10.995+6.10.587-5.10.658
Fence and open+4.40.755+7.30.616+3.60.801-3.20.831+4.00.784+8.70.57160.0%15+8.70.565+14.80.326+3.60.811
Open-4.30.674-1.40.890-5.10.626-11.90.292-4.70.658-0.10.995-8.70.56551.3%39+6.00.586-5.10.650
Rectangle-10.30.300-7.50.465-11.10.277-17.90.108-10.80.304-6.10.587-14.80.326-6.00.58645.2%42-11.20.315
Octagon+0.80.933+3.70.724+0.10.996-6.80.546+0.40.969+5.10.658-3.60.811+5.10.650+11.20.31556.4%39
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.