VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Jeffry vs Wolf

Jeffry vs Wolf in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Jeffry wins 52.0% of 6,959 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 counted6,959
Win rate52.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.0 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 fence55.0%+3.00.095707
Octagon53.7%+1.70.346713
Open53.3%+1.30.482694
Fence and open52.9%+0.80.763333
Rectangle52.7%+0.60.721687
Breakable half fence51.8%-0.20.900687
Half fence51.1%-1.00.595689
Single wall51.0%-1.10.558669
Breakable full fence50.8%-1.20.472746
Low fence50.7%-1.30.466686
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 5.33 on 9 df, p 0.805

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.0%707+4.20.108+3.90.141+3.20.231+4.30.109+4.00.132+2.20.512+1.70.521+2.30.383+1.30.622
Breakable full fence-4.20.10850.8%746-0.30.914-1.00.701+0.10.977-0.20.950-2.00.534-2.50.341-1.90.475-2.90.266
Half fence-3.90.141+0.30.91451.1%689-0.70.786+0.40.894+0.10.966-1.80.597-2.20.407-1.60.551-2.60.325
Breakable half fence-3.20.231+1.00.701+0.70.78651.8%687+1.10.686+0.80.755-1.00.757-1.50.578-0.90.746-1.90.477
Low fence-4.30.109-0.10.977-0.40.894-1.10.68650.7%686-0.20.929-2.10.525-2.60.336-2.00.467-3.00.263
Single wall-4.00.132+0.20.950-0.10.966-0.80.755+0.20.92951.0%669-1.90.575-2.30.387-1.70.526-2.80.307
Fence and open-2.20.512+2.00.534+1.80.597+1.00.757+2.10.525+1.90.57552.9%333-0.50.890+0.20.962-0.90.794
Open-1.70.521+2.50.341+2.20.407+1.50.578+2.60.336+2.30.387+0.50.89053.3%694+0.60.817-0.40.880
Rectangle-2.30.383+1.90.475+1.60.551+0.90.746+2.00.467+1.70.526-0.20.962-0.60.81752.7%687-1.00.701
Octagon-1.30.622+2.90.266+2.60.325+1.90.477+3.00.263+2.80.307+0.90.794+0.40.880+1.00.70153.7%713
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 counted3,901
Win rate53.0%
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
Full fence57.9%+4.90.044382
Octagon55.0%+2.00.388413
Open53.4%+0.50.845378
Breakable full fence53.1%+0.10.955454
Fence and open52.8%-0.20.953182
Rectangle52.7%-0.20.918387
Low fence51.9%-1.10.653376
Breakable half fence51.4%-1.50.532381
Single wall51.2%-1.70.487365
Half fence51.0%-1.90.430382
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 5.90 on 9 df, p 0.750

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.9%382+4.80.167+6.80.059+6.40.075+6.00.097+6.60.069+5.10.253+4.40.221+5.10.152+2.90.412
Breakable full fence-4.80.16753.1%454+2.00.557+1.60.636+1.20.726+1.90.598+0.30.939-0.40.919+0.40.915-1.90.579
Half fence-6.80.059-2.00.55751.0%382-0.40.913-0.80.822-0.20.960-1.70.706-2.40.509-1.70.644-3.90.269
Breakable half fence-6.40.075-1.60.636+0.40.91351.4%381-0.40.908+0.20.954-1.30.772-2.00.582-1.30.725-3.50.321
Low fence-6.00.097-1.20.726+0.80.822+0.40.90851.9%376+0.60.864-0.90.844-1.60.664-0.80.814-3.10.383
Single wall-6.60.069-1.90.598+0.20.960-0.20.954-0.60.86451.2%365-1.50.738-2.20.547-1.50.685-3.70.298
Fence and open-5.10.253-0.30.939+1.70.706+1.30.772+0.90.844+1.50.73852.8%182-0.70.878+0.00.994-2.20.617
Open-4.40.221+0.40.919+2.40.509+2.00.582+1.60.664+2.20.547+0.70.87853.4%378+0.70.841-1.50.667
Rectangle-5.10.152-0.40.915+1.70.644+1.30.725+0.80.814+1.50.685-0.00.994-0.70.84152.7%387-2.20.523
Octagon-2.90.412+1.90.579+3.90.269+3.50.321+3.10.383+3.70.298+2.20.617+1.50.667+2.20.52355.0%413
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 counted2,900
Win rate51.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.7 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
Open54.1%+2.90.301292
Fence and open53.1%+1.90.640143
Breakable half fence53.1%+1.80.510294
Rectangle52.9%+1.70.542289
Single wall52.3%+1.10.705281
Octagon51.8%+0.60.842276
Full fence51.4%+0.20.944315
Half fence51.2%-0.10.987293
Low fence49.5%-1.80.526295
Breakable full fence47.5%-3.70.188282
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 3.82 on 9 df, p 0.923

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.4%315+3.90.340+0.20.954-1.60.687+1.90.633-0.90.829-1.70.733-2.70.509-1.50.710-0.40.926
Breakable full fence-3.90.34047.5%282-3.70.378-5.50.183-2.00.635-4.80.255-5.60.273-6.60.114-5.40.195-4.30.310
Half fence-0.20.954+3.70.37851.2%293-1.90.651+1.70.680-1.10.789-2.00.702-2.90.480-1.80.673-0.60.883
Breakable half fence+1.60.687+5.50.183+1.90.65153.1%294+3.60.386+0.80.857-0.10.987-1.10.799+0.10.977+1.20.765
Low fence-1.90.633+2.00.635-1.70.680-3.60.38649.5%295-2.80.498-3.70.473-4.60.263-3.50.404-2.30.579
Single wall+0.90.829+4.80.255+1.10.789-0.80.857+2.80.49852.3%281-0.80.871-1.80.667-0.60.881+0.50.906
Fence and open+1.70.733+5.60.273+2.00.702+0.10.987+3.70.473+0.80.87153.1%143-1.00.850+0.20.968+1.30.795
Open+2.70.509+6.60.114+2.90.480+1.10.799+4.60.263+1.80.667+1.00.85054.1%292+1.20.778+2.30.583
Rectangle+1.50.710+5.40.195+1.80.673-0.10.977+3.50.404+0.60.881-0.20.968-1.20.77852.9%289+1.10.788
Octagon+0.40.926+4.30.310+0.60.883-1.20.765+2.30.579-0.50.906-1.30.795-2.30.583-1.10.78851.8%276
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 counted158
Win rate44.3%
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
Full fence60.0%+15.70.30210 ·
Octagon54.2%+9.90.29124 ·
Fence and open50.0%+5.70.7398 ·
Half fence50.0%+5.70.65314 ·
Low fence46.7%+2.40.84615 ·
Rectangle45.5%+1.10.93711 ·
Open41.7%-2.60.77824 ·
Breakable full fence40.0%-4.30.77710 ·
Breakable half fence33.3%-11.00.42612 ·
Single wall30.4%-13.90.14723 ·
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 4.79 on 9 df, p 0.852

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence60.0%10+20.00.371+10.00.628+26.70.211+13.30.513+29.60.110+10.00.671+18.30.329+14.60.505+5.80.755
Breakable full fence-20.00.37140.0%10-10.00.628+6.70.746-6.70.742+9.60.592-10.00.671-1.70.928-5.50.801-14.20.452
Half fence-10.00.628+10.00.62850.0%14+16.70.391+3.30.858+19.60.234+0.01.000+8.30.618+4.50.821-4.20.804
Breakable half fence-26.70.211-6.70.746-16.70.39133.3%12-13.30.484+2.90.861-16.70.456-8.30.629-12.10.552-20.80.238
Low fence-13.30.513+6.70.742-3.30.858+13.30.48446.7%15+16.20.311-3.30.879+5.00.759+1.20.951-7.50.648
Single wall-29.60.110-9.60.592-19.60.234-2.90.861-16.20.31130.4%23-19.60.319-11.20.423-15.00.391-23.70.100
Fence and open-10.00.671+10.00.671-0.01.000+16.70.456+3.30.879+19.60.31950.0%8+8.30.681+4.50.845-4.20.838
Open-18.30.329+1.70.928-8.30.618+8.30.629-5.00.759+11.20.423-8.30.68141.7%24-3.80.833-12.50.386
Rectangle-14.60.505+5.50.801-4.50.821+12.10.552-1.20.951+15.00.391-4.50.845+3.80.83345.5%11-8.70.632
Octagon-5.80.755+14.20.452+4.20.804+20.80.238+7.50.648+23.70.100+4.20.838+12.50.386+8.70.63254.2%24
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.