VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Kage vs Lau

Kage vs Lau in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Kage wins 50.7% of 5,345 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 counted5,345
Win rate50.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.3 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Kage's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open55.0%+4.30.125298
Open52.0%+1.30.535523
Single wall52.0%+1.20.525587
Rectangle51.8%+1.10.630481
Breakable half fence51.1%+0.40.834573
Half fence50.2%-0.50.806502
Full fence49.5%-1.20.561545
Octagon48.5%-2.20.279530
Low fence48.5%-2.20.279524
Breakable full fence48.3%-2.40.241536
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

Kage's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 6.78 on 9 df, p 0.660

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.5%545+1.20.688-0.70.832-1.60.594+1.10.727-2.40.416-5.50.127-2.50.420-2.20.477+1.10.730
Breakable full fence-1.20.68848.3%536-1.90.545-2.80.349-0.10.960-3.60.223-6.70.063-3.70.230-3.50.272-0.20.956
Half fence+0.70.832+1.90.54550.2%502-0.90.760+1.70.580-1.80.562-4.80.186-1.80.563-1.60.623+1.70.583
Breakable half fence+1.60.594+2.80.349+0.90.76051.1%573+2.70.379-0.80.779-3.90.274-0.90.773-0.60.838+2.60.380
Low fence-1.10.727+0.10.960-1.70.580-2.70.37948.5%524-3.50.246-6.60.071-3.50.253-3.30.297-0.00.996
Single wall+2.40.416+3.60.223+1.80.562+0.80.779+3.50.24652.0%587-3.10.386-0.10.987+0.20.950+3.50.247
Fence and open+5.50.127+6.70.063+4.80.186+3.90.274+6.60.071+3.10.38655.0%298+3.00.403+3.30.375+6.50.071
Open+2.50.420+3.70.230+1.80.563+0.90.773+3.50.253+0.10.987-3.00.40352.0%523+0.20.939+3.50.254
Rectangle+2.20.477+3.50.272+1.60.623+0.60.838+3.30.297-0.20.950-3.30.375-0.20.93951.8%481+3.30.298
Octagon-1.10.730+0.20.956-1.70.583-2.60.380+0.00.996-3.50.247-6.50.071-3.50.254-3.30.29848.5%530
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 counted1,310
Win rate51.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-9.2 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Kage's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable half fence57.2%+6.10.110152
Breakable full fence56.7%+5.60.173134
Fence and open54.3%+3.10.58970 ·
Rectangle53.9%+2.80.534115
Single wall50.8%-0.30.943120
Open50.4%-0.80.856129
Octagon49.2%-1.90.644134
Full fence47.6%-3.50.364147
Half fence46.7%-4.40.273137
Low fence41.9%-9.20.031124
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

Kage's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 10.73 on 9 df, p 0.295

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.6%147-9.10.127+0.90.879-9.60.096+5.70.349-3.20.601-6.70.359-2.80.646-6.30.312-1.60.784
Breakable full fence+9.10.12756.7%134+10.00.100-0.50.929+14.80.018+5.90.348+2.40.740+6.30.304+2.80.657+7.50.221
Half fence-0.90.879-10.00.10046.7%137-10.50.074+4.80.438-4.10.510-7.60.303-3.70.549-7.20.255-2.50.676
Breakable half fence+9.60.096+0.50.929+10.50.07457.2%152+15.30.011+6.40.292+3.00.680+6.80.251+3.30.588+8.00.177
Low fence-5.70.349-14.80.018-4.80.438-15.30.01141.9%124-8.90.163-12.30.098-8.40.178-12.00.064-7.30.238
Single wall+3.20.601-5.90.348+4.10.510-6.40.292+8.90.16350.8%120-3.50.646+0.40.944-3.10.637+1.60.802
Fence and open+6.70.359-2.40.740+7.60.303-3.00.680+12.30.098+3.50.64654.3%70+3.90.599+0.40.961+5.00.495
Open+2.80.646-6.30.304+3.70.549-6.80.251+8.40.178-0.40.944-3.90.59950.4%129-3.50.582+1.10.854
Rectangle+6.30.312-2.80.657+7.20.255-3.30.588+12.00.064+3.10.637-0.40.961+3.50.58253.9%115+4.70.463
Octagon+1.60.784-7.50.221+2.50.676-8.00.177+7.30.238-1.60.802-5.00.495-1.10.854-4.70.46349.2%134
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 counted3,052
Win rate51.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.2 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Kage's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open55.0%+3.30.357180
Single wall54.7%+3.00.222364
Full fence52.9%+1.30.650289
Open52.7%+1.10.705294
Half fence52.3%+0.60.838264
Breakable half fence52.0%+0.30.903327
Low fence51.1%-0.50.847305
Rectangle50.0%-1.70.559278
Octagon48.8%-2.80.301299
Breakable full fence46.5%-5.20.052310
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

Kage's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 7.14 on 9 df, p 0.623

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.9%289+6.50.112+0.70.875+0.90.813+1.80.662-1.70.660-2.10.664+0.20.958+2.90.484+4.10.319
Breakable full fence-6.50.11246.5%310-5.80.164-5.50.162-4.70.244-8.20.033-8.60.068-6.30.123-3.50.390-2.40.557
Half fence-0.70.875+5.80.16452.3%264+0.30.945+1.10.789-2.40.552-2.70.572-0.50.916+2.30.597+3.40.415
Breakable half fence-0.90.813+5.50.162-0.30.94552.0%327+0.80.833-2.70.480-3.00.515-0.70.855+2.00.626+3.20.430
Low fence-1.80.662+4.70.244-1.10.789-0.80.83351.1%305-3.50.363-3.90.412-1.60.700+1.10.782+2.30.569
Single wall+1.70.660+8.20.033+2.40.552+2.70.480+3.50.36354.7%364-0.30.942+1.90.618+4.70.240+5.80.134
Fence and open+2.10.664+8.60.068+2.70.572+3.00.515+3.90.412+0.30.94255.0%180+2.30.629+5.00.296+6.20.191
Open-0.20.958+6.30.123+0.50.916+0.70.855+1.60.700-1.90.618-2.30.62952.7%294+2.70.515+3.90.343
Rectangle-2.90.484+3.50.390-2.30.597-2.00.626-1.10.782-4.70.240-5.00.296-2.70.51550.0%278+1.20.779
Octagon-4.10.319+2.40.557-3.40.415-3.20.430-2.30.569-5.80.134-6.20.191-3.90.343-1.20.77948.8%299
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 counted983
Win rate47.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-8.9 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Kage's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open56.2%+9.10.19848 ·
Rectangle54.5%+7.30.14888
Open52.0%+4.80.311100
Half fence49.5%+2.30.625101
Low fence48.4%+1.20.80295
Octagon46.4%-0.80.86697
Single wall43.7%-3.50.450103
Full fence43.1%-4.10.365109
Breakable full fence42.4%-4.80.33292
Breakable half fence38.3%-8.90.06994
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: 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

Kage's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 9.76 on 9 df, p 0.370

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence43.1%109+0.70.917-6.40.354+4.80.486-5.30.448-0.60.933-13.10.129-8.90.199-11.40.111-3.30.637
Breakable full fence-0.70.91742.4%92-7.10.322+4.10.569-6.00.408-1.30.855-13.90.119-9.60.183-12.20.103-4.00.580
Half fence+6.40.354+7.10.32249.5%101+11.20.115+1.10.879+5.80.405-6.80.441-2.50.724-5.00.489+3.10.661
Breakable half fence-4.80.486-4.10.569-11.20.11538.3%94-10.10.160-5.40.442-17.90.042-13.70.055-16.20.028-8.10.258
Low fence+5.30.448+6.00.408-1.10.879+10.10.16048.4%95+4.70.504-7.80.376-3.60.617-6.10.408+2.00.778
Single wall+0.60.933+1.30.855-5.80.405+5.40.442-4.70.50443.7%103-12.60.150-8.30.236-10.90.135-2.70.701
Fence and open+13.10.129+13.90.119+6.80.441+17.90.042+7.80.376+12.60.15056.2%48+4.20.628+1.70.849+9.90.264
Open+8.90.199+9.60.183+2.50.724+13.70.055+3.60.617+8.30.236-4.20.62852.0%100-2.50.727+5.60.431
Rectangle+11.40.111+12.20.103+5.00.489+16.20.028+6.10.408+10.90.135-1.70.849+2.50.72754.5%88+8.20.268
Octagon+3.30.637+4.00.580-3.10.661+8.10.258-2.00.778+2.70.701-9.90.264-5.60.431-8.20.26846.4%97
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.