VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jeffry vs Shun

Jeffry vs Shun in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jeffry wins 50.0% of 5,119 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 counted5,119
Win rate50.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches5.0 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
Half fence55.0%+5.00.025464
Octagon51.6%+1.60.460457
Rectangle51.0%+1.00.639514
Breakable half fence50.4%+0.40.852540
Breakable full fence49.5%-0.50.792558
Full fence49.4%-0.60.754539
Fence and open49.2%-0.80.801258
Single wall48.6%-1.40.529463
Open48.5%-1.40.489515
Low fence46.5%-3.50.081559
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 9.00 on 9 df, p 0.437

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.4%539-0.10.970-5.60.076-1.00.738+2.80.346+0.80.812+0.10.973+0.80.793-1.60.599-2.30.471
Breakable full fence+0.10.97049.5%558-5.50.080-0.90.764+3.00.324+0.90.783+0.20.950+0.90.764-1.50.621-2.20.490
Half fence+5.60.076+5.50.08055.0%464+4.60.147+8.40.007+6.40.053+5.70.139+6.40.045+4.00.213+3.30.313
Breakable half fence+1.00.738+0.90.764-4.60.14750.4%540+3.90.201+1.80.575+1.10.762+1.80.553-0.60.845-1.30.689
Low fence-2.80.346-3.00.324-8.40.007-3.90.20146.5%559-2.10.507-2.70.470-2.00.505-4.50.144-5.10.104
Single wall-0.80.812-0.90.783-6.40.053-1.80.575+2.10.50748.6%463-0.60.871+0.10.987-2.40.458-3.00.356
Fence and open-0.10.973-0.20.950-5.70.139-1.10.762+2.70.470+0.60.87149.2%258+0.70.858-1.80.647-2.40.535
Open-0.80.793-0.90.764-6.40.045-1.80.553+2.00.505-0.10.987-0.70.85848.5%515-2.40.436-3.10.335
Rectangle+1.60.599+1.50.621-4.00.213+0.60.845+4.50.144+2.40.458+1.80.647+2.40.43651.0%514-0.70.835
Octagon+2.30.471+2.20.490-3.30.313+1.30.689+5.10.104+3.00.356+2.40.535+3.10.335+0.70.83551.6%457
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 counted2,385
Win rate50.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.9 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
Rectangle54.4%+3.90.213226
Half fence53.4%+2.90.366223
Fence and open53.3%+2.90.522120
Octagon51.7%+1.20.720211
Breakable half fence50.5%+0.00.989289
Single wall50.2%-0.20.944203
Low fence50.0%-0.50.882216
Full fence48.8%-1.70.574252
Breakable full fence47.5%-3.00.286276
Open47.3%-3.20.276256
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 5.02 on 9 df, p 0.832

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.8%252+1.40.757-4.50.322-1.70.692-1.20.797-1.40.761-4.50.415+1.50.728-5.60.220-2.90.541
Breakable full fence-1.40.75747.5%276-5.90.190-3.10.468-2.50.576-2.80.547-5.90.283+0.20.964-7.00.121-4.20.359
Half fence+4.50.322+5.90.19053.4%223+2.80.523+3.40.481+3.10.520+0.00.996+6.10.183-1.10.821+1.70.722
Breakable half fence+1.70.692+3.10.468-2.80.52350.5%289+0.50.908+0.30.953-2.80.604+3.20.448-3.90.379-1.10.801
Low fence+1.20.797+2.50.576-3.40.481-0.50.90850.0%216-0.20.960-3.30.558+2.70.554-4.40.352-1.70.732
Single wall+1.40.761+2.80.547-3.10.520-0.30.953+0.20.96050.2%203-3.10.592+3.00.526-4.20.387-1.40.774
Fence and open+4.50.415+5.90.283-0.00.996+2.80.604+3.30.558+3.10.59253.3%120+6.10.273-1.10.846+1.70.769
Open-1.50.728-0.20.964-6.10.183-3.20.448-2.70.554-3.00.526-6.10.27347.3%256-7.20.117-4.40.345
Rectangle+5.60.220+7.00.121+1.10.821+3.90.379+4.40.352+4.20.387+1.10.846+7.20.11754.4%226+2.80.563
Octagon+2.90.541+4.20.359-1.70.722+1.10.801+1.70.732+1.40.774-1.70.769+4.40.345-2.80.56351.7%211
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 counted2,537
Win rate49.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches5.4 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
Half fence55.3%+5.40.091226
Breakable full fence51.7%+1.80.544263
Breakable half fence51.6%+1.70.575242
Octagon51.5%+1.60.614229
Open51.2%+1.30.671242
Full fence49.8%-0.10.964261
Single wall49.0%-1.00.749239
Rectangle47.6%-2.40.412267
Fence and open45.3%-4.60.282128
Low fence45.3%-4.70.081307
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 8.07 on 9 df, p 0.527

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.8%261-1.90.663-5.50.225-1.80.679+4.50.281+0.90.849+4.50.404-1.40.748+2.20.606-1.70.704
Breakable full fence+1.90.66351.7%263-3.60.426+0.10.990+6.40.125+2.80.537+6.40.235+0.50.916+4.10.340+0.20.968
Half fence+5.50.225+3.60.42655.3%226+3.70.428+10.00.022+6.40.170+10.00.071+4.10.378+7.70.087+3.80.419
Breakable half fence+1.80.679-0.10.990-3.70.42851.6%242+6.40.138+2.70.554+6.30.246+0.40.928+4.10.357+0.10.978
Low fence-4.50.281-6.40.125-10.00.022-6.40.13845.3%307-3.70.393-0.00.995-6.00.165-2.30.583-6.20.152
Single wall-0.90.849-2.80.537-6.40.170-2.70.554+3.70.39349.0%239+3.60.506-2.30.616+1.40.755-2.60.578
Fence and open-4.50.404-6.40.235-10.00.071-6.30.246+0.00.995-3.60.50645.3%128-5.90.278-2.30.674-6.20.260
Open+1.40.748-0.50.916-4.10.378-0.40.928+6.00.165+2.30.616+5.90.27851.2%242+3.70.408-0.30.950
Rectangle-2.20.606-4.10.340-7.70.087-4.10.357+2.30.583-1.40.755+2.30.674-3.70.40847.6%267-4.00.379
Octagon+1.70.704-0.20.968-3.80.419-0.10.978+6.20.152+2.60.578+6.20.260+0.30.950+4.00.37951.5%229
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 counted197
Win rate44.7%
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
Half fence73.3%+28.70.02015 ·
Rectangle57.1%+12.50.22421 ·
Octagon52.9%+8.30.47317 ·
Full fence50.0%+5.30.55726 ·
Fence and open50.0%+5.30.72810 ·
Breakable full fence47.4%+2.70.80319 ·
Low fence36.1%-8.60.25336 ·
Open29.4%-15.30.18617 ·
Single wall28.6%-16.10.11621 ·
Breakable half fence11.1%-33.60.0389 ·
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 16.23 on 9 df, p 0.062

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%26+2.60.862-23.30.144+38.90.040+13.90.274+21.40.137+0.01.000+20.60.181-7.10.626-2.90.850
Breakable full fence-2.60.86247.4%19-26.00.127+36.30.061+11.30.418+18.80.220-2.60.893+18.00.270-9.80.536-5.60.738
Half fence+23.30.144+26.00.12773.3%15+62.20.003+37.20.015+44.80.008+23.30.234+43.90.013+16.20.319+20.40.234
Breakable half fence-38.90.040-36.30.061-62.20.00311.1%9-25.00.147-17.50.300-38.90.069-18.30.292-46.00.020-41.80.037
Low fence-13.90.274-11.30.418-37.20.015+25.00.14736.1%36+7.50.560-13.90.426+6.70.631-21.00.123-16.80.246
Single wall-21.40.137-18.80.220-44.80.008+17.50.300-7.50.56028.6%21-21.40.244-0.80.955-28.60.061-24.40.126
Fence and open-0.01.000+2.60.893-23.30.234+38.90.069+13.90.426+21.40.24450.0%10+20.60.285-7.10.709-2.90.883
Open-20.60.181-18.00.270-43.90.013+18.30.292-6.70.631+0.80.955-20.60.28529.4%17-27.70.087-23.50.163
Rectangle+7.10.626+9.80.536-16.20.319+46.00.020+21.00.123+28.60.061+7.10.709+27.70.08757.1%21+4.20.796
Octagon+2.90.850+5.60.738-20.40.234+41.80.037+16.80.246+24.40.126+2.90.883+23.50.163-4.20.79652.9%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.