VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jacky vs Wolf

Jacky vs Wolf in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jacky wins 50.7% of 11,732 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 counted11,732
Win rate50.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-2.1 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
Low fence52.1%+1.40.3291,160
Breakable half fence51.8%+1.10.4281,158
Octagon51.6%+0.90.5191,194
Half fence51.3%+0.60.6941,153
Full fence51.1%+0.40.7511,289
Breakable full fence50.0%-0.80.5891,165
Rectangle49.7%-1.00.4441,226
Fence and open49.7%-1.10.602592
Open49.1%-1.60.2741,107
Single wall48.6%-2.10.1491,114
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 5.94 on 9 df, p 0.746

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.1%1,289+1.20.563-0.10.948-0.70.734-0.90.641+2.50.227+1.50.556+2.00.333+1.40.467-0.50.816
Breakable full fence-1.20.56350.0%1,165-1.30.531-1.90.371-2.10.308+1.30.534+0.30.907+0.80.698+0.30.890-1.60.427
Half fence+0.10.948+1.30.53151.3%1,153-0.60.789-0.80.696+2.60.215+1.60.528+2.10.315+1.60.440-0.30.872
Breakable half fence+0.70.734+1.90.371+0.60.78951.8%1,158-0.30.902+3.20.132+2.10.394+2.70.204+2.10.296+0.20.914
Low fence+0.90.641+2.10.308+0.80.696+0.30.90252.1%1,160+3.40.103+2.40.340+2.90.163+2.40.242+0.50.817
Single wall-2.50.227-1.30.534-2.60.215-3.20.132-3.40.10348.6%1,114-1.00.692-0.50.818-1.00.622-2.90.158
Fence and open-1.50.556-0.30.907-1.60.528-2.10.394-2.40.340+1.00.69249.7%592+0.50.838-0.00.996-1.90.443
Open-2.00.333-0.80.698-2.10.315-2.70.204-2.90.163+0.50.818-0.50.83849.1%1,107-0.50.797-2.50.240
Rectangle-1.40.467-0.30.890-1.60.440-2.10.296-2.40.242+1.00.622+0.00.996+0.50.79749.7%1,226-1.90.346
Octagon+0.50.816+1.60.427+0.30.872-0.20.914-0.50.817+2.90.158+1.90.443+2.50.240+1.90.34651.6%1,194
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 counted6,406
Win rate50.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.0 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
Low fence53.2%+3.00.121622
Fence and open51.7%+1.40.594321
Full fence51.7%+1.40.422712
Half fence51.2%+1.00.601644
Breakable half fence50.6%+0.40.847636
Octagon49.1%-1.10.529696
Single wall48.9%-1.40.487597
Rectangle48.8%-1.50.420646
Breakable full fence47.9%-2.40.205639
Open47.7%-2.60.191583
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 7.53 on 9 df, p 0.582

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.7%712+3.80.163+0.50.870+1.10.698-1.50.577+2.80.317-0.00.993+4.00.152+2.90.282+2.50.339
Breakable full fence-3.80.16347.9%639-3.40.229-2.70.328-5.30.058-1.00.719-3.80.263+0.20.943-0.90.754-1.20.648
Half fence-0.50.870+3.40.22951.2%644+0.60.826-2.00.482+2.30.412-0.50.890+3.60.213+2.50.373+2.10.441
Breakable half fence-1.10.698+2.70.328-0.60.82650.6%636-2.60.359+1.70.547-1.10.751+3.00.304+1.90.504+1.50.587
Low fence+1.50.577+5.30.058+2.00.482+2.60.35953.2%622+4.30.133+1.50.662+5.50.055+4.50.113+4.10.139
Single wall-2.80.317+1.00.719-2.30.412-1.70.547-4.30.13348.9%597-2.80.418+1.20.673+0.10.958-0.20.935
Fence and open+0.00.993+3.80.263+0.50.890+1.10.751-1.50.662+2.80.41851.7%321+4.00.246+3.00.387+2.60.445
Open-4.00.152-0.20.943-3.60.213-3.00.304-5.50.055-1.20.673-4.00.24647.7%583-1.10.706-1.50.604
Rectangle-2.90.282+0.90.754-2.50.373-1.90.504-4.50.113-0.10.958-3.00.387+1.10.70648.8%646-0.40.890
Octagon-2.50.339+1.20.648-2.10.441-1.50.587-4.10.139+0.20.935-2.60.445+1.50.604+0.40.89049.1%696
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 counted4,872
Win rate51.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.5 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
Octagon54.9%+3.40.123459
Breakable full fence52.6%+1.10.604481
Breakable half fence52.1%+0.70.757491
Low fence52.1%+0.70.760493
Half fence51.5%-0.00.997476
Full fence51.1%-0.30.868528
Open51.0%-0.50.825457
Rectangle50.5%-1.00.621533
Single wall49.0%-2.40.267469
Fence and open48.0%-3.50.259252
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 5.17 on 9 df, p 0.819

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.1%528-1.50.642-0.30.916-1.00.749-1.00.751+2.10.509+3.10.415+0.20.962+0.70.828-3.80.237
Breakable full fence+1.50.64252.6%481+1.10.727+0.50.886+0.50.884+3.60.273+4.60.238+1.60.621+2.10.498-2.30.479
Half fence+0.30.916-1.10.72751.5%476-0.70.835-0.70.837+2.40.455+3.50.375+0.50.882+1.00.751-3.40.293
Breakable half fence+1.00.749-0.50.886+0.70.83552.1%491+0.00.998+3.10.337+4.10.287+1.20.722+1.70.593-2.80.393
Low fence+1.00.751-0.50.884+0.70.837-0.00.99852.1%493+3.10.338+4.10.288+1.10.724+1.70.595-2.80.392
Single wall-2.10.509-3.60.273-2.40.455-3.10.337-3.10.33849.0%469+1.00.793-1.90.554-1.40.652-5.90.074
Fence and open-3.10.415-4.60.238-3.50.375-4.10.287-4.10.288-1.00.79348.0%252-3.00.449-2.50.521-6.90.079
Open-0.20.962-1.60.621-0.50.882-1.20.722-1.10.724+1.90.554+3.00.44951.0%457+0.50.871-3.90.235
Rectangle-0.70.828-2.10.498-1.00.751-1.70.593-1.70.595+1.40.652+2.50.521-0.50.87150.5%533-4.40.163
Octagon+3.80.237+2.30.479+3.40.293+2.80.393+2.80.392+5.90.074+6.90.079+3.90.235+4.40.16354.9%459
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 counted454
Win rate48.7%
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 fence71.0%+22.30.01031 ·
Octagon56.4%+7.70.31239 ·
Rectangle53.2%+4.50.51347 ·
Breakable full fence51.1%+2.40.73145 ·
Open49.2%+0.60.91967 ·
Half fence48.5%-0.20.98233 ·
Full fence42.9%-5.80.38849 ·
Single wall41.7%-7.00.30448 ·
Fence and open36.8%-11.80.29219 ·
Low fence35.6%-13.10.06445 ·
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 13.37 on 9 df, p 0.147

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence42.9%49-8.20.423-5.60.616-28.10.014+7.30.469+1.20.906+6.00.651-6.40.495-10.30.311-13.60.206
Breakable full fence+8.20.42351.1%45+2.60.819-19.90.083+15.60.136+9.40.361+14.30.296+1.90.847-2.10.842-5.30.627
Half fence+5.60.616-2.60.81948.5%33-22.50.067+12.90.251+6.80.544+11.60.416-0.80.942-4.70.678-7.90.502
Breakable half fence+28.10.014+19.90.083+22.50.06771.0%31+35.40.002+29.30.011+34.10.018+21.70.044+17.80.116+14.60.211
Low fence-7.30.469-15.60.136-12.90.251-35.40.00235.6%45-6.10.545-1.30.922-13.70.152-17.60.089-20.90.055
Single wall-1.20.906-9.40.361-6.80.544-29.30.011+6.10.54541.7%48+4.80.717-7.60.421-11.50.261-14.70.171
Fence and open-6.00.651-14.30.296-11.60.416-34.10.018+1.30.922-4.80.71736.8%19-12.40.338-16.40.229-19.60.162
Open+6.40.495-1.90.847+0.80.942-21.70.044+13.70.152+7.60.421+12.40.33849.2%67-3.90.679-7.20.477
Rectangle+10.30.311+2.10.842+4.70.678-17.80.116+17.60.089+11.50.261+16.40.229+3.90.67953.2%47-3.20.765
Octagon+13.60.206+5.30.627+7.90.502-14.60.211+20.90.055+14.70.171+19.60.162+7.20.477+3.20.76556.4%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.