VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Sarah

Jacky vs Sarah in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 50.6% of 9,193 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 counted9,193
Win rate50.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches1.9 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
Low fence52.5%+1.90.207960
Open51.6%+1.10.477968
Full fence51.1%+0.60.719929
Half fence51.0%+0.50.784829
Rectangle50.5%-0.10.937896
Breakable half fence50.0%-0.60.722878
Octagon50.0%-0.60.681973
Single wall49.9%-0.60.698859
Fence and open49.6%-1.00.658464
Breakable full fence48.7%-1.80.222985
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 3.99 on 9 df, p 0.912

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.1%929+2.40.294+0.10.965+1.10.631-1.40.551+1.20.616+1.60.583-0.50.820+0.70.770+1.20.606
Breakable full fence-2.40.29448.7%985-2.30.330-1.30.584-3.80.096-1.20.604-0.80.766-2.90.197-1.70.457-1.20.590
Half fence-0.10.965+2.30.33051.0%829+1.00.672-1.50.534+1.10.656+1.50.615-0.60.791+0.60.810+1.10.649
Breakable half fence-1.10.631+1.30.584-1.00.67250.0%878-2.50.284+0.10.981+0.40.881-1.60.478-0.50.851+0.10.982
Low fence+1.40.551+3.80.096+1.50.534+2.50.28452.5%960+2.60.276+2.90.300+0.80.710+2.00.376+2.50.262
Single wall-1.20.616+1.20.604-1.10.656-0.10.981-2.60.27649.9%859+0.40.897-1.70.465-0.50.833-0.00.998
Fence and open-1.60.583+0.80.766-1.50.615-0.40.881-2.90.300-0.40.89749.6%464-2.10.460-0.90.759-0.40.893
Open+0.50.820+2.90.197+0.60.791+1.60.478-0.80.710+1.70.465+2.10.46051.6%968+1.20.603+1.70.453
Rectangle-0.70.770+1.70.457-0.60.810+0.50.851-2.00.376+0.50.833+0.90.759-1.20.60350.5%896+0.50.830
Octagon-1.20.606+1.20.590-1.10.649-0.10.982-2.50.262+0.00.998+0.40.893-1.70.453-0.50.83050.0%973
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 counted4,420
Win rate52.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.9 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
Low fence57.1%+4.90.034420
Breakable half fence53.3%+1.10.646428
Octagon53.0%+0.80.706498
Breakable full fence52.8%+0.60.792445
Full fence52.1%-0.20.946436
Open51.7%-0.60.798480
Rectangle51.5%-0.80.739443
Single wall51.2%-1.00.668412
Fence and open51.1%-1.10.723231
Half fence47.6%-4.60.054403
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 8.29 on 9 df, p 0.505

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.1%436-0.80.825+4.40.201-1.20.722-5.10.136+0.80.804+1.00.809+0.40.904+0.60.859-0.90.772
Breakable full fence+0.80.82552.8%445+5.20.133-0.50.891-4.30.200+1.60.640+1.70.670+1.10.728+1.30.689-0.20.950
Half fence-4.40.201-5.20.13347.6%403-5.60.105-9.50.006-3.60.308-3.40.404-4.00.234-3.80.266-5.40.109
Breakable half fence+1.20.722+0.50.891+5.60.10553.3%428-3.90.257+2.10.551+2.20.591+1.60.629+1.80.594+0.30.937
Low fence+5.10.136+4.30.200+9.50.006+3.90.25757.1%420+5.90.086+6.10.137+5.50.100+5.70.094+4.10.210
Single wall-0.80.804-1.60.640+3.60.308-2.10.551-5.90.08651.2%412+0.10.974-0.50.893-0.30.941-1.80.589
Fence and open-1.00.809-1.70.670+3.40.404-2.20.591-6.10.137-0.10.97451.1%231-0.60.884-0.40.924-1.90.627
Open-0.40.904-1.10.728+4.00.234-1.60.629-5.50.100+0.50.893+0.60.88451.7%480+0.20.952-1.30.674
Rectangle-0.60.859-1.30.689+3.80.266-1.80.594-5.70.094+0.30.941+0.40.924-0.20.95251.5%443-1.50.636
Octagon+0.90.772+0.20.950+5.40.109-0.30.937-4.10.210+1.80.589+1.90.627+1.30.674+1.50.63653.0%498
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 counted4,212
Win rate49.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches5.8 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
Half fence55.1%+5.80.016392
Open51.9%+2.60.263422
Full fence50.1%+0.80.725429
Rectangle49.8%+0.40.853402
Fence and open48.5%-0.80.814200
Low fence48.0%-1.30.547479
Octagon48.0%-1.30.563419
Breakable half fence47.9%-1.40.545399
Breakable full fence46.9%-2.40.269469
Single wall46.5%-2.80.249389
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 9.82 on 9 df, p 0.365

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.1%429+3.20.337-5.00.153+2.20.518+2.10.527+3.60.305+1.60.706-1.80.604+0.40.916+2.10.532
Breakable full fence-3.20.33746.9%469-8.20.017-1.00.777-1.10.733+0.40.912-1.60.706-5.00.137-2.80.403-1.10.751
Half fence+5.00.153+8.20.01755.1%392+7.20.042+7.10.037+8.60.017+6.60.128+3.20.359+5.30.131+7.10.042
Breakable half fence-2.20.518+1.00.777-7.20.04247.9%399-0.10.965+1.30.706-0.60.884-4.00.249-1.90.594-0.10.977
Low fence-2.10.527+1.10.733-7.10.037+0.10.96548.0%479+1.50.663-0.50.909-3.90.245-1.70.608+0.10.989
Single wall-3.60.305-0.40.912-8.60.017-1.30.706-1.50.66346.5%389-2.00.650-5.40.127-3.20.365-1.40.682
Fence and open-1.60.706+1.60.706-6.60.128+0.60.884+0.50.909+2.00.65048.5%200-3.40.429-1.20.772+0.50.902
Open+1.80.604+5.00.137-3.20.359+4.00.249+3.90.245+5.40.127+3.40.42951.9%422+2.10.538+3.90.255
Rectangle-0.40.916+2.80.403-5.30.131+1.90.594+1.70.608+3.20.365+1.20.772-2.10.53849.8%402+1.80.610
Octagon-2.10.532+1.10.751-7.10.042+0.10.977-0.10.989+1.40.682-0.50.902-3.90.255-1.80.61048.0%419
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 counted561
Win rate47.1%
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
Single wall63.8%+16.70.00758 ·
Low fence55.7%+8.70.15061 ·
Full fence51.6%+4.50.44364 ·
Open50.0%+2.90.61066 ·
Rectangle47.1%+0.01.00051 ·
Fence and open45.5%-1.60.84933 ·
Half fence44.1%-2.90.72334 ·
Breakable half fence39.2%-7.80.23951 ·
Octagon37.5%-9.60.13156 ·
Breakable full fence35.2%-11.80.03271 ·
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 16.57 on 9 df, p 0.056

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.6%64+16.40.055+7.40.483+12.30.187-4.20.640-12.20.173+6.10.569+1.60.859+4.50.631+14.10.122
Breakable full fence-16.40.05535.2%71-8.90.379-4.00.651-20.50.018-28.60.001-10.20.318-14.80.080-11.80.188-2.30.790
Half fence-7.40.483+8.90.37944.1%34+4.90.653-11.60.277-19.70.066-1.30.912-5.90.577-2.90.790+6.60.534
Breakable half fence-12.30.187+4.00.651-4.90.65339.2%51-16.50.081-24.60.010-6.20.571-10.80.245-7.80.424+1.70.855
Low fence+4.20.640+20.50.018+11.60.277+16.50.08155.7%61-8.10.371+10.30.341+5.70.518+8.70.360+18.20.048
Single wall+12.20.173+28.60.001+19.70.066+24.60.010+8.10.37163.8%58+18.30.089+13.80.122+16.70.079+26.30.005
Fence and open-6.10.569+10.20.318+1.30.912+6.20.571-10.30.341-18.30.08945.5%33-4.50.670-1.60.886+8.00.460
Open-1.60.859+14.80.080+5.90.577+10.80.245-5.70.518-13.80.122+4.50.67050.0%66+2.90.752+12.50.166
Rectangle-4.50.631+11.80.188+2.90.790+7.80.424-8.70.360-16.70.079+1.60.886-2.90.75247.1%51+9.60.317
Octagon-14.10.122+2.30.790-6.60.534-1.70.855-18.20.048-26.30.005-8.00.460-12.50.166-9.60.31737.5%56
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.