VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jeffry vs Lion

Jeffry vs Lion in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jeffry wins 51.7% of 4,476 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 counted4,476
Win rate51.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.8 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
Breakable half fence56.4%+4.70.039438
Rectangle55.6%+3.90.075460
Full fence54.6%+2.90.199445
Fence and open54.2%+2.50.431238
Low fence54.1%+2.40.311416
Breakable full fence51.1%-0.60.801436
Single wall50.8%-0.90.688435
Half fence48.9%-2.80.204456
Octagon48.4%-3.30.128479
Open45.9%-5.80.008468
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 19.65 on 9 df, p 0.020

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.6%445+3.50.304+5.70.087-1.80.593+0.50.878+3.80.259+0.40.919+8.70.009-1.00.752+6.20.061
Breakable full fence-3.50.30451.1%436+2.20.503-5.20.120-2.90.390+0.30.920-3.00.448+5.20.118-4.50.177+2.70.412
Half fence-5.70.087-2.20.50348.9%456-7.50.025-5.20.126-1.90.571-5.30.185+3.00.367-6.80.041+0.50.886
Breakable half fence+1.80.593+5.20.120+7.50.02556.4%438+2.30.498+5.60.098+2.20.584+10.40.002+0.70.823+8.00.016
Low fence-0.50.878+2.90.390+5.20.126-2.30.49854.1%416+3.30.338-0.10.977+8.20.016-1.60.642+5.70.092
Single wall-3.80.259-0.30.920+1.90.571-5.60.098-3.30.33850.8%435-3.40.399+4.90.144-4.80.146+2.40.474
Fence and open-0.40.919+3.00.448+5.30.185-2.20.584+0.10.977+3.40.39954.2%238+8.30.038-1.40.715+5.80.146
Open-8.70.009-5.20.118-3.00.367-10.40.002-8.20.016-4.90.144-8.30.03845.9%468-9.70.003-2.50.442
Rectangle+1.00.752+4.50.177+6.80.041-0.70.823+1.60.642+4.80.146+1.40.715+9.70.00355.6%460+7.20.027
Octagon-6.20.061-2.70.412-0.50.886-8.00.016-5.70.092-2.40.474-5.80.146+2.50.442-7.20.02748.4%479
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 counted1,874
Win rate53.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-7.7 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
Fence and open57.8%+4.70.311109
Low fence56.8%+3.70.293185
Breakable half fence56.5%+3.40.327184
Rectangle55.8%+2.70.412208
Breakable full fence54.0%+0.90.802161
Single wall53.6%+0.50.888181
Full fence52.6%-0.50.887209
Octagon50.6%-2.50.488172
Half fence49.8%-3.30.303211
Open45.4%-7.70.033174
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 9.03 on 9 df, p 0.434

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.6%209-1.40.788+2.90.557-3.90.440-4.10.412-1.00.850-5.20.380+7.20.159-3.10.520+2.00.690
Breakable full fence+1.40.78854.0%161+4.30.414-2.50.643-2.70.612+0.50.934-3.80.542+8.60.114-1.70.740+3.50.528
Half fence-2.90.557-4.30.41449.8%211-6.80.179-7.00.164-3.80.450-8.00.173+4.40.394-6.00.218-0.80.873
Breakable half fence+3.90.440+2.50.643+6.80.17956.5%184-0.20.964+2.90.574-1.30.831+11.10.035+0.80.881+5.90.261
Low fence+4.10.412+2.70.612+7.00.164+0.20.96456.8%185+3.20.543-1.00.862+11.40.031+1.00.844+6.20.242
Single wall+1.00.850-0.50.934+3.80.450-2.90.574-3.20.54353.6%181-4.20.485+8.20.123-2.20.667+3.00.572
Fence and open+5.20.380+3.80.542+8.00.173+1.30.831+1.00.862+4.20.48557.8%109+12.40.042+2.00.729+7.20.237
Open-7.20.159-8.60.114-4.40.394-11.10.035-11.40.031-8.20.123-12.40.04245.4%174-10.40.044-5.20.335
Rectangle+3.10.520+1.70.740+6.00.218-0.80.881-1.00.844+2.20.667-2.00.729+10.40.04455.8%208+5.20.313
Octagon-2.00.690-3.50.528+0.80.873-5.90.261-6.20.242-3.00.572-7.20.237+5.20.335-5.20.31350.6%172
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 counted2,298
Win rate49.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches7.3 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 half fence57.1%+7.30.020226
Full fence55.8%+6.10.067206
Rectangle55.2%+5.50.086219
Fence and open50.9%+1.10.804116
Low fence49.8%+0.00.996205
Breakable full fence47.8%-1.90.517251
Single wall46.9%-2.90.367224
Half fence46.8%-2.90.362220
Octagon46.7%-3.00.304261
Open45.2%-4.50.120261
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 15.53 on 9 df, p 0.077

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.8%206+8.00.088+9.00.063-1.20.793+6.10.218+8.90.064+5.00.391+10.60.023+0.60.905+9.10.051
Breakable full fence-8.00.08847.8%251+1.00.830-9.30.043-1.90.679+0.90.839-3.00.586+2.60.556-7.40.107+1.10.809
Half fence-9.00.063-1.00.83046.8%220-10.30.030-2.90.545-0.10.990-4.00.481+1.60.725-8.40.077+0.10.987
Breakable half fence+1.20.793+9.30.043+10.30.03057.1%226+7.30.128+10.20.030+6.20.274+11.90.009+1.80.698+10.30.023
Low fence-6.10.218+1.90.679+2.90.545-7.30.12849.8%205+2.90.551-1.10.849+4.50.329-5.50.257+3.00.518
Single wall-8.90.064-0.90.839+0.10.990-10.20.030-2.90.55146.9%224-4.00.485+1.70.714-8.40.078+0.10.977
Fence and open-5.00.391+3.00.586+4.00.481-6.20.274+1.10.849+4.00.48550.9%116+5.70.310-4.40.443+4.10.460
Open-10.60.023-2.60.556-1.60.725-11.90.009-4.50.329-1.70.714-5.70.31045.2%261-10.00.028-1.50.725
Rectangle-0.60.905+7.40.107+8.40.077-1.80.698+5.50.257+8.40.078+4.40.443+10.00.02855.2%219+8.50.063
Octagon-9.10.051-1.10.809-0.10.987-10.30.023-3.00.518-0.10.977-4.10.460+1.50.725-8.50.06346.7%261
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 counted304
Win rate58.2%
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 fence69.2%+11.00.23426 ·
Breakable full fence66.7%+8.40.38224 ·
Single wall63.3%+5.10.55030 ·
Full fence60.0%+1.80.83530 ·
Half fence60.0%+1.80.85125 ·
Rectangle57.6%-0.60.93633 ·
Open54.5%-3.70.65033 ·
Fence and open53.9%-4.40.74413 ·
Breakable half fence50.0%-8.20.35428 ·
Octagon50.0%-8.20.22046 ·
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 4.73 on 9 df, p 0.857

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence60.0%30-6.70.614+0.01.000+10.00.444-9.20.472-3.30.791+6.20.707+5.50.662+2.40.845+10.00.393
Breakable full fence+6.70.61466.7%24+6.70.628+16.70.225-2.60.846+3.30.799+12.80.443+12.10.357+9.10.486+16.70.183
Half fence-0.01.000-6.70.62860.0%25+10.00.465-9.20.490-3.30.800+6.20.715+5.50.678+2.40.853+10.00.420
Breakable half fence-10.00.444-16.70.225-10.00.46550.0%28-19.20.151-13.30.306-3.90.819-4.50.723-7.60.554+0.01.000
Low fence+9.20.472+2.60.846+9.20.490+19.20.15169.2%26+5.90.642+15.40.345+14.70.251+11.70.358+19.20.113
Single wall+3.30.791-3.30.799+3.30.800+13.30.306-5.90.64263.3%30+9.50.559+8.80.479+5.80.641+13.30.253
Fence and open-6.20.707-12.80.443-6.20.715+3.90.819-15.40.345-9.50.55953.9%13-0.70.966-3.70.818+3.90.807
Open-5.50.662-12.10.357-5.50.678+4.50.723-14.70.251-8.80.479+0.70.96654.5%33-3.00.804+4.50.690
Rectangle-2.40.845-9.10.486-2.40.853+7.60.554-11.70.358-5.80.641+3.70.818+3.00.80457.6%33+7.60.506
Octagon-10.00.393-16.70.183-10.00.420-0.01.000-19.20.113-13.30.253-3.90.807-4.50.690-7.60.50650.0%46
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.