VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jeffry vs Lei Fei

Jeffry vs Lei Fei in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jeffry wins 52.7% of 3,204 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 1 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 counted3,204
Win rate52.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-7.9 pts
Survive correction1
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
Breakable full fence59.1%+6.40.018306
Fence and open58.3%+5.60.144163
Octagon57.7%+5.00.059326
Rectangle55.1%+2.40.369312
Open53.4%+0.70.792339
Breakable half fence52.8%+0.10.960352
Low fence50.8%-1.90.440366
Half fence50.0%-2.70.303322
Full fence48.4%-4.30.130279
Single wall44.8%-7.90.003308
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 22.41 on 9 df, p 0.008

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.4%279-10.80.009-1.60.693-4.50.266-2.40.540+3.60.385-9.90.045-5.00.215-6.70.102-9.30.023
Breakable full fence+10.80.00959.1%306+9.20.021+6.30.104+8.30.031+14.3<0.001+0.90.856+5.80.141+4.00.312+1.50.706
Half fence+1.60.693-9.20.02150.0%322-2.80.461-0.80.830+5.20.192-8.30.084-3.40.383-5.10.196-7.70.050
Breakable half fence+4.50.266-6.30.104+2.80.46152.8%352+2.00.588+8.00.039-5.40.249-0.60.885-2.30.555-4.80.207
Low fence+2.40.540-8.30.031+0.80.830-2.00.58850.8%366+6.00.120-7.50.112-2.60.495-4.30.263-6.80.071
Single wall-3.60.385-14.3<0.001-5.20.192-8.00.039-6.00.12044.8%308-13.50.005-8.60.029-10.30.010-12.90.001
Fence and open+9.90.045-0.90.856+8.30.084+5.40.249+7.50.112+13.50.00558.3%163+4.90.302+3.10.511+0.60.897
Open+5.00.215-5.80.141+3.40.383+0.60.885+2.60.495+8.60.029-4.90.30253.4%339-1.70.657-4.30.267
Rectangle+6.70.102-4.00.312+5.10.196+2.30.555+4.30.263+10.30.010-3.10.511+1.70.65755.1%312-2.50.518
Octagon+9.30.023-1.50.706+7.70.050+4.80.207+6.80.071+12.90.001-0.60.897+4.30.267+2.50.51857.7%326
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 counted1,153
Win rate50.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-8.7 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
Breakable full fence55.9%+5.90.191111
Octagon55.3%+5.40.174141
Fence and open52.6%+2.70.67957 ·
Rectangle51.8%+1.80.684112
Low fence50.0%+0.00.992132
Open49.2%-0.80.856122
Breakable half fence47.3%-2.70.520129
Half fence47.2%-2.80.514125
Full fence45.6%-4.40.38490
Single wall41.2%-8.70.07397
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 7.88 on 9 df, p 0.546

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence45.6%90-10.30.146-1.60.812-1.70.800-4.40.515+4.30.552-7.10.403-3.60.601-6.20.379-9.80.148
Breakable full fence+10.30.14655.9%111+8.70.184+8.60.185+5.90.362+14.60.035+3.20.691+6.70.308+4.10.542+0.50.932
Half fence+1.60.812-8.70.18447.2%125-0.10.989-2.80.654+6.00.375-5.40.497-2.00.755-4.60.481-8.10.186
Breakable half fence+1.70.800-8.60.185+0.10.98947.3%129-2.70.661+6.00.365-5.30.501-1.90.764-4.50.486-8.00.187
Low fence+4.40.515-5.90.362+2.80.654+2.70.66150.0%132+8.80.189-2.60.740+0.80.896-1.80.781-5.30.379
Single wall-4.30.552-14.60.035-6.00.375-6.00.365-8.80.18941.2%97-11.40.170-7.90.241-10.60.128-14.10.033
Fence and open+7.10.403-3.20.691+5.40.497+5.30.501+2.60.740+11.40.17052.6%57+3.50.667+0.80.917-2.70.731
Open+3.60.601-6.70.308+2.00.755+1.90.764-0.80.896+7.90.241-3.50.66749.2%122-2.60.690-6.10.320
Rectangle+6.20.379-4.10.542+4.60.481+4.50.486+1.80.781+10.60.128-0.80.917+2.60.69051.8%112-3.50.576
Octagon+9.80.148-0.50.932+8.10.186+8.00.187+5.30.379+14.10.033+2.70.731+6.10.320+3.50.57655.3%141
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 counted1,837
Win rate55.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches7.8 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
Fence and open62.9%+7.80.11397
Breakable full fence62.6%+7.50.034179
Octagon59.8%+4.70.200169
Breakable half fence58.4%+3.30.326197
Open57.6%+2.50.463191
Rectangle57.2%+2.10.545180
Half fence52.0%-3.10.394173
Low fence50.2%-4.80.137207
Full fence50.0%-5.10.167166
Single wall49.5%-5.60.100190
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 16.21 on 9 df, p 0.063

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%166-12.60.019-2.00.710-8.40.110-0.20.963+0.50.921-12.90.043-7.60.151-7.20.178-9.80.073
Breakable full fence+12.60.01962.6%179+10.60.045+4.20.406+12.30.015+13.10.011-0.30.959+5.00.329+5.30.301+2.80.591
Half fence+2.00.710-10.60.04552.0%173-6.40.220+1.80.729+2.50.628-10.90.085-5.60.286-5.20.327-7.70.150
Breakable half fence+8.40.110-4.20.406+6.40.22058.4%197+8.10.101+8.90.079-4.50.458+0.80.876+1.20.821-1.40.788
Low fence+0.20.963-12.30.015-1.80.729-8.10.10150.2%207+0.80.879-12.70.039-7.30.142-7.00.170-9.50.065
Single wall-0.50.921-13.10.011-2.50.628-8.90.079-0.80.87949.5%190-13.40.031-8.10.112-7.80.135-10.30.051
Fence and open+12.90.043+0.30.959+10.90.085+4.50.458+12.70.039+13.40.03162.9%97+5.30.387+5.70.360+3.10.615
Open+7.60.151-5.00.329+5.60.286-0.80.876+7.30.142+8.10.112-5.30.38757.6%191+0.40.943-2.20.676
Rectangle+7.20.178-5.30.301+5.20.327-1.20.821+7.00.170+7.80.135-5.70.360-0.40.94357.2%180-2.50.630
Octagon+9.80.073-2.80.591+7.70.150+1.40.788+9.50.065+10.30.051-3.10.615+2.20.676+2.50.63059.8%169
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 counted214
Win rate47.2%
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 fence59.3%+12.10.17927 ·
Octagon56.2%+9.10.45116 ·
Rectangle55.0%+7.80.46320 ·
Half fence50.0%+2.80.77024 ·
Full fence47.8%+0.60.94923 ·
Fence and open44.4%-2.80.8669 ·
Breakable full fence43.8%-3.50.77416 ·
Open42.3%-4.90.59426 ·
Breakable half fence38.5%-8.70.34126 ·
Single wall19.1%-28.10.00721 ·
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 10.35 on 9 df, p 0.323

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.8%23+4.10.802-2.20.882+9.40.509-11.40.419+28.80.044+3.40.863+5.50.698-7.20.639-8.40.605
Breakable full fence-4.10.80243.8%16-6.20.698+5.30.735-15.50.324+24.70.103-0.70.973+1.40.927-11.20.502-12.50.480
Half fence+2.20.882+6.20.69850.0%24+11.50.412-9.30.507+30.90.030+5.60.776+7.70.586-5.00.741-6.20.698
Breakable half fence-9.40.509-5.30.735-11.50.41238.5%26-20.80.130+19.40.148-6.00.752-3.90.777-16.50.264-17.80.261
Low fence+11.40.419+15.50.324+9.30.507+20.80.13059.3%27+40.20.005+14.80.439+16.90.217+4.30.770+3.00.847
Single wall-28.80.044-24.70.103-30.90.030-19.40.148-40.20.00519.1%21-25.40.149-23.30.089-36.00.017-37.20.019
Fence and open-3.40.863+0.70.973-5.60.776+6.00.752-14.80.439+25.40.14944.4%9+2.10.911-10.60.599-11.80.571
Open-5.50.698-1.40.927-7.70.586+3.90.777-16.90.217+23.30.089-2.10.91142.3%26-12.70.393-13.90.380
Rectangle+7.20.639+11.20.502+5.00.741+16.50.264-4.30.770+36.00.017+10.60.599+12.70.39355.0%20-1.20.940
Octagon+8.40.605+12.50.480+6.20.698+17.80.261-3.00.847+37.20.019+11.80.571+13.90.380+1.20.94056.2%16
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.