VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jeffry vs Pai

Jeffry vs Pai in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jeffry wins 52.0% of 5,272 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 counted5,272
Win rate52.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.9 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
Octagon55.2%+3.20.127498
Fence and open55.0%+3.00.301282
Rectangle54.8%+2.90.152558
Open52.8%+0.80.697521
Low fence52.4%+0.40.852554
Full fence51.7%-0.20.913516
Breakable half fence51.7%-0.30.883538
Breakable full fence50.9%-1.10.590525
Single wall50.7%-1.30.545505
Half fence48.1%-3.90.077470
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 8.45 on 9 df, p 0.490

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.7%516+0.90.775+3.60.251+0.10.982-0.60.844+1.10.737-3.20.384-1.00.738-3.10.310-3.50.267
Breakable full fence-0.90.77550.9%525+2.80.383-0.80.790-1.50.625+0.20.958-4.10.265-1.90.533-4.00.190-4.40.162
Half fence-3.60.251-2.80.38348.1%470-3.60.256-4.30.174-2.60.416-6.90.068-4.70.140-6.80.031-7.10.026
Breakable half fence-0.10.982+0.80.790+3.60.25651.7%538-0.70.824+1.00.752-3.30.370-1.10.718-3.20.294-3.50.253
Low fence+0.60.844+1.50.625+4.30.174+0.70.82452.4%554+1.70.591-2.60.473-0.40.886-2.50.405-2.90.351
Single wall-1.10.737-0.20.958+2.60.416-1.00.752-1.70.59150.7%505-4.30.250-2.10.503-4.20.176-4.50.151
Fence and open+3.20.384+4.10.265+6.90.068+3.30.370+2.60.473+4.30.25055.0%282+2.20.554+0.10.972-0.30.945
Open+1.00.738+1.90.533+4.70.140+1.10.718+0.40.886+2.10.503-2.20.55452.8%521-2.10.499-2.40.435
Rectangle+3.10.310+4.00.190+6.80.031+3.20.294+2.50.405+4.20.176-0.10.972+2.10.49954.8%558-0.40.901
Octagon+3.50.267+4.40.162+7.10.026+3.50.253+2.90.351+4.50.151+0.30.945+2.40.435+0.40.90155.2%498
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 counted2,962
Win rate51.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.2 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
Rectangle56.2%+4.70.085306
Open54.2%+2.70.366260
Fence and open54.2%+2.70.480166
Full fence54.1%+2.60.341301
Octagon53.9%+2.30.414286
Breakable full fence52.4%+0.80.768296
Single wall50.4%-1.20.667288
Breakable half fence49.5%-2.10.456293
Low fence48.9%-2.70.317313
Half fence46.4%-5.20.071278
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 9.74 on 9 df, p 0.372

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.1%301+1.80.662+7.80.062+4.70.255+5.30.191+3.80.355-0.10.989-0.10.985-2.10.611+0.30.941
Breakable full fence-1.80.66252.4%296+6.00.153+2.90.485+3.50.390+2.00.626-1.90.702-1.90.660-3.90.344-1.50.720
Half fence-7.80.062-6.00.15346.4%278-3.10.461-2.50.547-4.00.348-7.80.111-7.80.070-9.80.018-7.50.077
Breakable half fence-4.70.255-2.90.485+3.10.46149.5%293+0.60.881-0.90.836-4.70.330-4.70.265-6.70.099-4.40.294
Low fence-5.30.191-3.50.390+2.50.547-0.60.88148.9%313-1.50.720-5.30.266-5.30.202-7.30.068-5.00.225
Single wall-3.80.355-2.00.626+4.00.348+0.90.836+1.50.72050.4%288-3.90.427-3.90.363-5.90.152-3.50.401
Fence and open+0.10.989+1.90.702+7.80.111+4.70.330+5.30.266+3.90.42754.2%166-0.00.998-2.00.677+0.40.939
Open+0.10.985+1.90.660+7.80.070+4.70.265+5.30.202+3.90.363+0.00.99854.2%260-2.00.637+0.40.928
Rectangle+2.10.611+3.90.344+9.80.018+6.70.099+7.30.068+5.90.152+2.00.677+2.00.63756.2%306+2.40.564
Octagon-0.30.941+1.50.720+7.50.077+4.40.294+5.00.225+3.50.401-0.40.939-0.40.928-2.40.56453.9%286
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 counted2,130
Win rate52.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.9 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 fence57.4%+4.90.130216
Octagon56.9%+4.40.198195
Fence and open56.2%+3.70.419112
Breakable half fence53.7%+1.20.706229
Rectangle53.4%+0.90.774234
Open52.5%+0.00.998236
Single wall51.3%-1.30.704199
Half fence49.4%-3.10.389176
Breakable full fence48.8%-3.70.252215
Full fence48.0%-4.60.178198
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 8.00 on 9 df, p 0.534

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.0%198-0.90.862-1.40.779-5.70.237-9.40.055-3.30.514-8.30.162-4.60.344-5.40.260-8.90.076
Breakable full fence+0.90.86248.8%215-0.60.907-4.90.304-8.60.075-2.40.623-7.40.203-3.70.432-4.60.332-8.10.101
Half fence+1.40.779+0.60.90749.4%176-4.30.393-8.00.115-1.80.724-6.80.259-3.10.532-4.00.424-7.50.149
Breakable half fence+5.70.237+4.90.304+4.30.39353.7%229-3.70.433+2.50.612-2.50.658+1.20.801+0.30.950-3.20.508
Low fence+9.40.055+8.60.075+8.00.115+3.70.43357.4%216+6.20.209+1.20.841+4.90.299+4.00.395+0.50.921
Single wall+3.30.514+2.40.623+1.80.724-2.50.612-6.20.20951.3%199-5.00.397-1.30.789-2.20.653-5.70.259
Fence and open+8.30.162+7.40.203+6.80.259+2.50.658-1.20.841+5.00.39756.2%112+3.70.517+2.80.621-0.70.909
Open+4.60.344+3.70.432+3.10.532-1.20.801-4.90.299+1.30.789-3.70.51752.5%236-0.90.849-4.40.363
Rectangle+5.40.260+4.60.332+4.00.424-0.30.950-4.00.395+2.20.653-2.80.621+0.90.84953.4%234-3.50.468
Octagon+8.90.076+8.10.101+7.50.149+3.20.508-0.50.921+5.70.259+0.70.909+4.40.363+3.50.46856.9%195
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 counted180
Win rate52.2%
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
Breakable half fence62.5%+10.30.38916 ·
Half fence62.5%+10.30.38916 ·
Octagon58.8%+6.60.56717 ·
Full fence52.9%+0.70.95017 ·
Low fence52.0%-0.20.98125 ·
Breakable full fence50.0%-2.20.86214 ·
Fence and open50.0%-2.20.9284 ·
Rectangle50.0%-2.20.84218 ·
Single wall50.0%-2.20.84218 ·
Open40.0%-12.20.18725 ·
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 3.26 on 9 df, p 0.953

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.9%17+2.90.870-9.60.579-9.60.579+0.90.952+2.90.862+2.90.916+12.90.408+2.90.862-5.90.730
Breakable full fence-2.90.87050.0%14-12.50.491-12.50.491-2.00.905+0.01.000+0.01.000+10.00.546+0.01.000-8.80.623
Half fence+9.60.579+12.50.49162.5%16+0.01.000+10.50.509+12.50.464+12.50.648+22.50.160+12.50.464+3.70.829
Breakable half fence+9.60.579+12.50.491-0.01.00062.5%16+10.50.509+12.50.464+12.50.648+22.50.160+12.50.464+3.70.829
Low fence-0.90.952+2.00.905-10.50.509-10.50.50952.0%25+2.00.897+2.00.941+12.00.395+2.00.897-6.80.663
Single wall-2.90.862-0.01.000-12.50.464-12.50.464-2.00.89750.0%18+0.01.000+10.00.515+0.01.000-8.80.600
Fence and open-2.90.916-0.01.000-12.50.648-12.50.648-2.00.941-0.01.00050.0%4+10.00.706+0.01.000-8.80.748
Open-12.90.408-10.00.546-22.50.160-22.50.160-12.00.395-10.00.515-10.00.70640.0%25-10.00.515-18.80.231
Rectangle-2.90.862-0.01.000-12.50.464-12.50.464-2.00.897-0.01.000-0.01.000+10.00.51550.0%18-8.80.600
Octagon+5.90.730+8.80.623-3.70.829-3.70.829+6.80.663+8.80.600+8.80.748+18.80.231+8.80.60058.8%17
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.