VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Shun

Jacky vs Shun in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 50.9% of 8,707 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 counted8,707
Win rate50.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches2.5 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
Octagon53.4%+2.50.108912
Rectangle52.7%+1.90.246878
Breakable full fence52.1%+1.20.483801
Full fence51.8%+0.90.5191,009
Fence and open51.5%+0.60.814373
Breakable half fence50.1%-0.80.617843
Open49.5%-1.40.409836
Low fence49.4%-1.40.365880
Half fence49.3%-1.60.328892
Single wall48.7%-2.10.172903
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 8.50 on 9 df, p 0.485

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.8%1,009-0.20.924+2.50.275+1.80.447+2.40.298+3.10.175+0.40.906+2.30.323-0.90.696-1.60.493
Breakable full fence+0.20.92452.1%801+2.70.262+2.00.417+2.60.282+3.30.170+0.60.852+2.50.304-0.70.783-1.30.580
Half fence-2.50.275-2.70.26249.3%892-0.70.761-0.10.965+0.60.799-2.10.486-0.20.936-3.40.152-4.10.084
Breakable half fence-1.80.447-2.00.417+0.70.76150.1%843+0.60.795+1.30.578-1.40.649+0.50.826-2.70.267-3.30.162
Low fence-2.40.298-2.60.282+0.10.965-0.60.79549.4%880+0.70.766-2.00.508-0.10.970-3.30.166-4.00.093
Single wall-3.10.175-3.30.170-0.60.799-1.30.578-0.70.76648.7%903-2.70.372-0.80.740-4.00.091-4.70.046
Fence and open-0.40.906-0.60.852+2.10.486+1.40.649+2.00.508+2.70.37251.5%373+1.90.530-1.30.683-1.90.530
Open-2.30.323-2.50.304+0.20.936-0.50.826+0.10.970+0.80.740-1.90.53049.5%836-3.20.184-3.90.105
Rectangle+0.90.696+0.70.783+3.40.152+2.70.267+3.30.166+4.00.091+1.30.683+3.20.18452.7%878-0.70.778
Octagon+1.60.493+1.30.580+4.10.084+3.30.162+4.00.093+4.70.046+1.90.530+3.90.105+0.70.77853.4%912
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 counted4,042
Win rate50.5%
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
Octagon55.5%+5.10.026434
Fence and open54.6%+4.10.282163
Rectangle51.8%+1.40.545434
Full fence51.8%+1.30.556450
Low fence50.4%-0.10.972389
Open49.6%-0.80.720419
Breakable full fence48.4%-2.00.402382
Breakable half fence48.4%-2.10.376395
Half fence47.2%-3.30.152428
Single wall46.6%-3.90.112384
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 11.70 on 9 df, p 0.231

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.8%450+3.40.336+4.60.175+3.40.321+1.40.687+5.20.137-2.80.536+2.10.529-0.10.984-3.80.263
Breakable full fence-3.40.33648.4%382+1.20.726+0.10.983-2.00.587+1.80.615-6.20.187-1.20.732-3.40.330-7.10.043
Half fence-4.60.175-1.20.72647.2%428-1.10.740-3.20.362+0.60.868-7.40.108-2.40.476-4.60.172-8.30.014
Breakable half fence-3.40.321-0.10.983+1.10.74048.4%395-2.00.570+1.70.627-6.20.180-1.30.713-3.50.316-7.20.039
Low fence-1.40.687+2.00.587+3.20.362+2.00.57050.4%389+3.80.294-4.20.366+0.80.833-1.40.676-5.10.140
Single wall-5.20.137-1.80.615-0.60.868-1.70.627-3.80.29446.6%384-8.00.087-3.00.391-5.20.135-8.90.011
Fence and open+2.80.536+6.20.187+7.40.108+6.20.180+4.20.366+8.00.08754.6%163+5.00.283+2.80.548-0.90.839
Open-2.10.529+1.20.732+2.40.476+1.30.713-0.80.833+3.00.391-5.00.28349.6%419-2.20.520-5.90.085
Rectangle+0.10.984+3.40.330+4.60.172+3.50.316+1.40.676+5.20.135-2.80.548+2.20.52051.8%434-3.70.276
Octagon+3.80.263+7.10.043+8.30.014+7.20.039+5.10.140+8.90.011+0.90.839+5.90.085+3.70.27655.5%434
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 counted3,991
Win rate50.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.2 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
Breakable full fence54.5%+4.10.100369
Rectangle54.1%+3.70.131381
Octagon51.8%+1.40.543417
Half fence51.7%+1.30.589381
Breakable half fence51.7%+1.30.590383
Full fence50.9%+0.50.831470
Single wall48.5%-1.90.403427
Low fence47.7%-2.70.249415
Open47.0%-3.40.172364
Fence and open45.2%-5.20.144186
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 10.93 on 9 df, p 0.281

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.9%470-3.60.297-0.90.804-0.80.806+3.10.351+2.40.478+5.70.189+3.90.267-3.20.350-0.90.778
Breakable full fence+3.60.29754.5%369+2.80.448+2.80.446+6.80.059+6.00.092+9.30.038+7.50.042+0.40.912+2.70.454
Half fence+0.90.804-2.80.44851.7%381+0.00.998+4.00.260+3.20.360+6.50.143+4.70.197-2.40.514-0.10.979
Breakable half fence+0.80.806-2.80.446-0.00.99851.7%383+4.00.261+3.20.360+6.50.144+4.70.197-2.40.512-0.10.977
Low fence-3.10.351-6.80.059-4.00.260-4.00.26147.7%415-0.80.824+2.50.563+0.70.838-6.40.073-4.10.238
Single wall-2.40.478-6.00.092-3.20.360-3.20.360+0.80.82448.5%427+3.30.450+1.50.674-5.60.113-3.30.335
Fence and open-5.70.189-9.30.038-6.50.143-6.50.144-2.50.563-3.30.45045.2%186-1.80.686-8.90.046-6.60.132
Open-3.90.267-7.50.042-4.70.197-4.70.197-0.70.838-1.50.674+1.80.68647.0%364-7.10.053-4.80.179
Rectangle+3.20.350-0.40.912+2.40.514+2.40.512+6.40.073+5.60.113+8.90.046+7.10.05354.1%381+2.30.521
Octagon+0.90.778-2.70.454+0.10.979+0.10.977+4.10.238+3.30.335+6.60.132+4.80.179-2.30.52151.8%417
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 counted674
Win rate56.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-6.8 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 open79.2%+22.90.02124 ·
Open66.0%+9.80.13453 ·
Breakable full fence62.0%+5.80.39350 ·
Single wall58.7%+2.50.60892
Full fence57.3%+1.10.82789
Low fence54.0%-2.30.67076 ·
Rectangle50.8%-5.40.36163 ·
Breakable half fence50.8%-5.50.35065 ·
Half fence49.4%-6.80.18083
Octagon49.2%-7.00.24461 ·
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 12.62 on 9 df, p 0.181

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.3%89-4.70.589+7.90.299+6.50.421+3.40.665-1.40.850-21.90.050-8.70.303+6.50.427+8.10.327
Breakable full fence+4.70.58962.0%50+12.60.158+11.20.229+8.10.372+3.30.701-17.20.140-4.00.669+11.20.234+12.80.177
Half fence-7.90.299-12.60.15849.4%83-1.40.868-4.50.566-9.30.218-29.80.010-16.60.057-1.40.867+0.20.979
Breakable half fence-6.50.421-11.20.229+1.40.86850.8%65-3.20.706-7.90.325-28.40.016-15.30.095-0.00.998+1.60.859
Low fence-3.40.665-8.10.372+4.50.566+3.20.70654.0%76-4.80.537-25.20.028-12.10.170+3.20.711+4.80.579
Single wall+1.40.850-3.30.701+9.30.218+7.90.325+4.80.53758.7%92-20.50.064-7.30.382+7.90.331+9.50.247
Fence and open+21.90.050+17.20.140+29.80.010+28.40.016+25.20.028+20.50.06479.2%24+13.10.244+28.40.016+30.00.012
Open+8.70.303+4.00.669+16.60.057+15.30.095+12.10.170+7.30.382-13.10.24466.0%53+15.20.098+16.90.070
Rectangle-6.50.427-11.20.234+1.40.867+0.00.998-3.20.711-7.90.331-28.40.016-15.20.09850.8%63+1.60.857
Octagon-8.10.327-12.80.177-0.20.979-1.60.859-4.80.579-9.50.247-30.00.012-16.90.070-1.60.85749.2%61
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.