VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jeffry vs Kage

Jeffry vs Kage in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jeffry wins 49.3% of 5,168 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 counted5,168
Win rate49.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.2 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Jeffry's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Low fence52.5%+3.20.124520
Half fence50.8%+1.50.481482
Fence and open50.6%+1.30.673259
Full fence50.3%+1.00.631547
Breakable half fence49.7%+0.40.846517
Octagon49.3%+0.00.997497
Rectangle48.3%-1.00.634540
Single wall47.0%-2.30.267513
Open46.9%-2.40.237525
Breakable full fence46.6%-2.70.203500
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

Jeffry's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 6.95 on 9 df, p 0.642

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.3%547+3.70.235-0.60.859+0.60.854-2.20.467+3.30.283-0.30.936+3.40.263+1.90.522+1.00.752
Breakable full fence-3.70.23546.6%500-4.20.185-3.10.321-5.90.060-0.40.904-4.00.298-0.30.934-1.70.576-2.70.394
Half fence+0.60.859+4.20.18550.8%482+1.10.723-1.70.597+3.90.225+0.20.948+4.00.208+2.50.426+1.50.631
Breakable half fence-0.60.854+3.10.321-1.10.72349.7%517-2.80.369+2.70.380-0.90.819+2.90.357+1.40.655+0.40.895
Low fence+2.20.467+5.90.060+1.70.597+2.80.36952.5%520+5.50.076+1.90.613+5.60.068+4.20.175+3.20.307
Single wall-3.30.283+0.40.904-3.90.225-2.70.380-5.50.07647.0%513-3.60.344+0.10.969-1.40.660-2.30.461
Fence and open+0.30.936+4.00.298-0.20.948+0.90.819-1.90.613+3.60.34450.6%259+3.70.327+2.20.552+1.30.738
Open-3.40.263+0.30.934-4.00.208-2.90.357-5.60.068-0.10.969-3.70.32746.9%525-1.50.630-2.40.435
Rectangle-1.90.522+1.70.576-2.50.426-1.40.655-4.20.175+1.40.660-2.20.552+1.50.63048.3%540-1.00.757
Octagon-1.00.752+2.70.394-1.50.631-0.40.895-3.20.307+2.30.461-1.30.738+2.40.435+1.00.75749.3%497
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 counted1,853
Win rate50.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches8.0 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Jeffry's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Full fence58.8%+8.00.017199
Breakable half fence58.0%+7.20.049169
Fence and open55.7%+4.90.301106
Half fence51.2%+0.50.904162
Low fence50.7%-0.00.989203
Single wall48.5%-2.30.493194
Rectangle47.1%-3.70.259204
Octagon47.0%-3.80.304164
Breakable full fence46.1%-4.70.186178
Open45.5%-5.30.137176
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

Jeffry's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 15.73 on 9 df, p 0.073

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence58.8%199+12.70.013+7.60.151+0.80.876+8.10.105+10.30.040+3.10.598+13.30.010+11.70.018+11.80.024
Breakable full fence-12.70.01346.1%178-5.20.341-11.90.026-4.70.363-2.40.645-9.60.118+0.60.908-1.00.846-0.90.870
Half fence-7.60.151+5.20.34151.2%162-6.80.217+0.50.925+2.80.601-4.40.478+5.80.288+4.20.427+4.30.439
Breakable half fence-0.80.876+11.90.026+6.80.21758.0%169+7.20.162+9.50.069+2.30.704+12.50.020+10.90.035+11.00.044
Low fence-8.10.105+4.70.363-0.50.925-7.20.16250.7%203+2.30.649-4.90.411+5.30.305+3.70.458+3.80.471
Single wall-10.30.040+2.40.645-2.80.601-9.50.069-2.30.64948.5%194-7.20.233+3.00.564+1.40.781+1.50.777
Fence and open-3.10.598+9.60.118+4.40.478-2.30.704+4.90.411+7.20.23355.7%106+10.20.097+8.60.151+8.70.162
Open-13.30.010-0.60.908-5.80.288-12.50.020-5.30.305-3.00.564-10.20.09745.5%176-1.60.754-1.50.782
Rectangle-11.70.018+1.00.846-4.20.427-10.90.035-3.70.458-1.40.781-8.60.151+1.60.75447.1%204+0.10.984
Octagon-11.80.024+0.90.870-4.30.439-11.00.044-3.80.471-1.50.777-8.70.162+1.50.782-0.10.98447.0%164
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 counted3,010
Win rate48.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.0 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Jeffry's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Low fence52.6%+4.00.150287
Half fence50.7%+2.10.450284
Octagon50.3%+1.80.516308
Rectangle49.7%+1.10.678314
Breakable full fence48.6%+0.10.978296
Fence and open46.7%-1.90.656137
Full fence46.5%-2.00.444318
Single wall46.5%-2.10.458284
Open46.3%-2.30.383322
Breakable half fence44.7%-3.90.149311
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

Jeffry's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 6.61 on 9 df, p 0.677

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.5%318-2.10.601-4.20.308+1.90.642-6.10.136+0.10.988-0.20.973+0.30.946-3.10.429-3.80.344
Breakable full fence+2.10.60148.6%296-2.00.621+4.00.329-4.00.338+2.20.601+1.90.708+2.40.555-1.00.799-1.70.680
Half fence+4.20.308+2.00.62150.7%284+6.00.143-1.90.648+4.20.314+4.00.443+4.40.276+1.00.803+0.40.926
Breakable half fence-1.90.642-4.00.329-6.00.14344.7%311-7.90.053-1.80.662-2.00.692-1.60.690-5.00.212-5.60.161
Low fence+6.10.136+4.00.338+1.90.648+7.90.05352.6%287+6.10.143+5.90.256+6.30.118+2.90.473+2.30.577
Single wall-0.10.988-2.20.601-4.20.314+1.80.662-6.10.14346.5%284-0.20.964+0.20.960-3.20.434-3.80.350
Fence and open+0.20.973-1.90.708-4.00.443+2.00.692-5.90.256+0.20.96446.7%137+0.50.931-3.00.562-3.60.482
Open-0.30.946-2.40.555-4.40.276+1.60.690-6.30.118-0.20.960-0.50.93146.3%322-3.40.390-4.00.309
Rectangle+3.10.429+1.00.799-1.00.803+5.00.212-2.90.473+3.20.434+3.00.562+3.40.39049.7%314-0.60.873
Octagon+3.80.344+1.70.680-0.40.926+5.60.161-2.30.577+3.80.350+3.60.482+4.00.309+0.60.87350.3%308
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 counted305
Win rate47.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Jeffry's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Low fence63.3%+15.80.06830 ·
Open63.0%+15.40.09327 ·
Breakable half fence54.0%+6.50.39737 ·
Octagon52.0%+4.50.64125 ·
Fence and open50.0%+2.50.84016 ·
Half fence50.0%+2.50.75336 ·
Single wall42.9%-4.70.55535 ·
Rectangle40.9%-6.60.51822 ·
Full fence33.3%-14.20.10130 ·
Breakable full fence26.9%-20.60.02826 ·
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

Jeffry's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 14.06 on 9 df, p 0.120

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence33.3%30+6.40.603-16.70.173-20.70.090-30.00.020-9.50.431-16.70.270-29.60.025-7.60.575-18.70.162
Breakable full fence-6.40.60326.9%26-23.10.068-27.10.032-36.40.006-15.90.200-23.10.130-36.00.008-14.00.306-25.10.067
Half fence+16.70.173+23.10.06850.0%36-4.00.729-13.30.277+7.10.546+0.01.000-13.00.306+9.10.501-2.00.878
Breakable half fence+20.70.090+27.10.032+4.00.72954.0%37-9.30.444+11.20.342+4.00.786-8.90.476+13.10.329+2.00.874
Low fence+30.00.020+36.40.006+13.30.277+9.30.44463.3%30+20.50.099+13.30.382+0.40.977+22.40.109+11.30.396
Single wall+9.50.431+15.90.200-7.10.546-11.20.342-20.50.09942.9%35-7.10.634-20.10.116+1.90.885-9.10.484
Fence and open+16.70.270+23.10.130-0.01.000-4.00.786-13.30.382+7.10.63450.0%16-13.00.405+9.10.578-2.00.901
Open+29.60.025+36.00.008+13.00.306+8.90.476-0.40.977+20.10.116+13.00.40563.0%27+22.10.124+11.00.424
Rectangle+7.60.575+14.00.306-9.10.501-13.10.329-22.40.109-1.90.885-9.10.578-22.10.12440.9%22-11.10.447
Octagon+18.70.162+25.10.067+2.00.878-2.00.874-11.30.396+9.10.484+2.00.901-11.00.424+11.10.44752.0%25
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.