VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Taka

Jacky vs Taka in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 47.2% of 2,816 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 counted2,816
Win rate47.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-6.9 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 open51.9%+4.70.272131
Breakable half fence50.3%+3.10.259294
Full fence50.0%+2.80.320288
Octagon48.2%+1.00.728280
Half fence46.8%-0.40.892235
Open46.6%-0.70.813292
Low fence46.1%-1.10.693299
Rectangle45.6%-1.60.549294
Single wall42.3%-4.90.082279
Breakable full fence40.3%-6.90.015278
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 11.45 on 9 df, p 0.246

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%288+9.70.020+3.20.468-0.30.935+3.90.351+7.70.066-1.90.717+3.40.409+4.40.286+1.80.670
Breakable full fence-9.70.02040.3%278-6.50.137-10.10.016-5.90.155-2.00.631-11.60.027-6.30.130-5.30.201-7.90.059
Half fence-3.20.468+6.50.13746.8%235-3.50.419+0.70.880+4.50.305-5.10.349+0.20.957+1.20.778-1.40.750
Breakable half fence+0.30.935+10.10.016+3.50.41950.3%294+4.20.308+8.10.054-1.60.765+3.80.362+4.80.248+2.10.611
Low fence-3.90.351+5.90.155-0.70.880-4.20.30846.1%299+3.90.351-5.80.272-0.40.918+0.60.888-2.10.620
Single wall-7.70.066+2.00.631-4.50.305-8.10.054-3.90.35142.3%279-9.60.068-4.30.303-3.30.429-5.90.160
Fence and open+1.90.717+11.60.027+5.10.349+1.60.765+5.80.272+9.60.06851.9%131+5.30.310+6.30.228+3.70.485
Open-3.40.409+6.30.130-0.20.957-3.80.362+0.40.918+4.30.303-5.30.31046.6%292+1.00.809-1.60.695
Rectangle-4.40.286+5.30.201-1.20.778-4.80.248-0.60.888+3.30.429-6.30.228-1.00.80945.6%294-2.60.527
Octagon-1.80.670+7.90.059+1.40.750-2.10.611+2.10.620+5.90.160-3.70.485+1.60.695+2.60.52748.2%280
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 counted1,155
Win rate49.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-9.0 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 open55.6%+6.60.32454 ·
Breakable half fence54.2%+5.20.232120
Low fence51.5%+2.50.540134
Full fence50.9%+1.90.674110
Rectangle49.3%+0.30.943140
Single wall46.4%-2.60.560110
Half fence45.7%-3.30.51094
Octagon45.7%-3.30.431129
Breakable full fence40.7%-8.30.071108
Open40.0%-9.00.06795
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 9.47 on 9 df, p 0.395

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.9%110+10.20.132+5.20.462-3.30.621-0.60.928+4.50.500-4.70.576+10.90.118+1.60.799+5.20.425
Breakable full fence-10.20.13240.7%108-5.00.474-13.40.043-10.80.096-5.60.403-14.80.074+0.70.915-8.60.180-5.00.440
Half fence-5.20.462+5.00.47445.7%94-8.40.221-5.80.393-0.60.930-9.80.250+5.70.425-3.50.595+0.00.999
Breakable half fence+3.30.621+13.40.043+8.40.22154.2%120+2.70.670+7.80.237-1.40.865+14.20.039+4.90.432+8.40.184
Low fence+0.60.928+10.80.096+5.80.393-2.70.67051.5%134+5.10.425-4.10.614+11.50.086+2.20.715+5.80.350
Single wall-4.50.500+5.60.403+0.60.930-7.80.237-5.10.42546.4%110-9.20.269+6.40.359-2.90.646+0.60.923
Fence and open+4.70.576+14.80.074+9.80.250+1.40.865+4.10.614+9.20.26955.6%54+15.60.067+6.30.434+9.80.225
Open-10.90.118-0.70.915-5.70.425-14.20.039-11.50.086-6.40.359-15.60.06740.0%95-9.30.161-5.70.392
Rectangle-1.60.799+8.60.180+3.50.595-4.90.432-2.20.715+2.90.646-6.30.434+9.30.16149.3%140+3.50.560
Octagon-5.20.425+5.00.440-0.00.999-8.40.184-5.80.350-0.60.923-9.80.225+5.70.392-3.50.56045.7%129
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 counted1,452
Win rate45.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-6.5 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
Open48.6%+3.00.388179
Octagon48.5%+2.90.470136
Full fence48.5%+2.90.434163
Half fence48.4%+2.80.521122
Fence and open47.5%+1.90.76959 ·
Breakable half fence47.2%+1.60.672159
Low fence42.0%-3.60.358143
Rectangle40.6%-5.00.225133
Single wall40.6%-5.00.214138
Breakable full fence39.1%-6.50.089151
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 8.22 on 9 df, p 0.512

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.5%163+9.40.094+0.10.986+1.30.816+6.50.254+7.90.170+1.00.894-0.10.980+7.90.176-0.10.991
Breakable full fence-9.40.09439.1%151-9.30.124-8.10.150-2.90.614-1.50.794-8.40.268-9.50.082-1.50.793-9.50.107
Half fence-0.10.986+9.30.12448.4%122+1.20.843+6.40.296+7.80.207+0.90.909-0.20.967+7.80.213-0.20.978
Breakable half fence-1.30.816+8.10.150-1.20.84347.2%159+5.20.363+6.60.254-0.30.970-1.40.792+6.60.260-1.40.816
Low fence-6.50.254+2.90.614-6.40.296-5.20.36342.0%143+1.40.815-5.50.473-6.60.234+1.40.819-6.60.270
Single wall-7.90.170+1.50.794-7.80.207-6.60.254-1.40.81540.6%138-6.90.371-8.00.155-0.00.997-8.00.186
Fence and open-1.00.894+8.40.268-0.90.909+0.30.970+5.50.473+6.90.37147.5%59-1.10.879+6.90.376-1.10.891
Open+0.10.980+9.50.082+0.20.967+1.40.792+6.60.234+8.00.155+1.10.87948.6%179+8.00.160+0.10.990
Rectangle-7.90.176+1.50.793-7.80.213-6.60.260-1.40.819+0.00.997-6.90.376-8.00.16040.6%133-7.90.191
Octagon+0.10.991+9.50.107+0.20.978+1.40.816+6.60.270+8.00.186+1.10.891-0.10.990+7.90.19148.5%136
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 counted209
Win rate48.8%
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
Octagon66.7%+17.90.15115 ·
Open61.1%+12.30.27518 ·
Full fence60.0%+11.20.36815 ·
Fence and open55.6%+6.80.54918 ·
Breakable half fence53.3%+4.50.71615 ·
Rectangle52.4%+3.60.73021 ·
Breakable full fence47.4%-1.40.89619 ·
Half fence42.1%-6.70.54019 ·
Low fence40.9%-7.90.43422 ·
Single wall35.5%-13.30.10831 ·
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 7.35 on 9 df, p 0.600

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence60.0%15+12.60.464+17.90.300+6.70.713+19.10.254+24.50.116+4.40.797-1.10.948+7.60.650-6.70.705
Breakable full fence-12.60.46447.4%19+5.30.744-6.00.730+6.50.678+11.90.405-8.20.618-13.70.402-5.00.752-19.30.260
Half fence-17.90.300-5.30.74442.1%19-11.20.515+1.20.938+6.60.640-13.40.413-19.00.248-10.30.516-24.60.154
Breakable half fence-6.70.713+6.00.730+11.20.51553.3%15+12.40.457+17.90.249-2.20.898-7.80.653+0.90.955-13.30.456
Low fence-19.10.254-6.50.678-1.20.938-12.40.45740.9%22+5.40.688-14.70.356-20.20.204-11.50.451-25.80.124
Single wall-24.50.116-11.90.405-6.60.640-17.90.249-5.40.68835.5%31-20.10.171-25.60.082-16.90.226-31.20.047
Fence and open-4.40.797+8.20.618+13.40.413+2.20.898+14.70.356+20.10.17155.6%18-5.50.735+3.20.843-11.10.515
Open+1.10.948+13.70.402+19.00.248+7.80.653+20.20.204+25.60.082+5.50.73561.1%18+8.70.584-5.60.741
Rectangle-7.60.650+5.00.752+10.30.516-0.90.955+11.50.451+16.90.226-3.20.843-8.70.58452.4%21-14.30.391
Octagon+6.70.705+19.30.260+24.60.154+13.30.456+25.80.124+31.20.047+11.10.515+5.60.741+14.30.39166.7%15
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.