Virtua Fighter 5 REVO · v1.10 · Character Matchup Winrates
Lau vs Lion
Matches counted3,017
Win rate51.3%
Widest swing7.0 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Lau's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fence and open | 58.4% | +7.0 | 0.091 | 137 | |
| Breakable half fence | 54.8% | +3.4 | 0.247 | 263 | |
| Full fence | 53.6% | +2.2 | 0.409 | 308 | |
| Octagon | 52.8% | +1.5 | 0.601 | 284 | |
| Half fence | 52.3% | +1.0 | 0.712 | 325 | |
| Single wall | 52.0% | +0.7 | 0.798 | 292 | |
| Low fence | 51.0% | -0.3 | 0.897 | 345 | |
| Rectangle | 50.6% | -0.7 | 0.797 | 308 | |
| Breakable full fence | 46.7% | -4.6 | 0.059 | 366 | |
| Open | 45.3% | -6.0 | 0.044 | 256 |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Lau's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 11.92 on 9 df, p 0.218
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 53.6%308 | +6.80.076 | +1.30.750 | -1.20.778 | +2.60.514 | +1.50.710 | -4.80.345 | +8.30.051 | +2.90.468 | +0.80.854 |
| Breakable full fence | -6.80.076 | 46.7%366 | -5.60.143 | -8.00.047 | -4.30.252 | -5.30.174 | -11.70.020 | +1.40.729 | -3.90.309 | -6.10.123 |
| Half fence | -1.30.750 | +5.60.143 | 52.3%325 | -2.40.555 | +1.30.738 | +0.30.950 | -6.10.230 | +7.00.094 | +1.70.676 | -0.50.900 |
| Breakable half fence | +1.20.778 | +8.00.047 | +2.40.555 | 54.8%263 | +3.70.360 | +2.70.525 | -3.60.486 | +9.40.032 | +4.10.328 | +1.90.650 |
| Low fence | -2.60.514 | +4.30.252 | -1.30.738 | -3.70.360 | 51.0%345 | -1.00.794 | -7.40.143 | +5.70.167 | +0.40.926 | -1.80.653 |
| Single wall | -1.50.710 | +5.30.174 | -0.30.950 | -2.70.525 | +1.00.794 | 52.0%292 | -6.30.219 | +6.70.115 | +1.40.731 | -0.80.855 |
| Fence and open | +4.80.345 | +11.70.020 | +6.10.230 | +3.60.486 | +7.40.143 | +6.30.219 | 58.4%137 | +13.10.013 | +7.70.131 | +5.60.281 |
| Open | -8.30.051 | -1.40.729 | -7.00.094 | -9.40.032 | -5.70.167 | -6.70.115 | -13.10.013 | 45.3%256 | -5.30.207 | -7.50.082 |
| Rectangle | -2.90.468 | +3.90.309 | -1.70.676 | -4.10.328 | -0.40.926 | -1.40.731 | -7.70.131 | +5.30.207 | 50.6%308 | -2.20.598 |
| Octagon | -0.80.854 | +6.10.123 | +0.50.900 | -1.90.650 | +1.80.653 | +0.80.855 | -5.60.281 | +7.50.082 | +2.20.598 | 52.8%284 |
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
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.
Matches counted2,008
Win rate49.6%
Widest swing9.0 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Lau's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fence and open | 58.6% | +9.0 | 0.087 | 87 | |
| Breakable half fence | 54.6% | +5.0 | 0.170 | 172 | |
| Full fence | 52.9% | +3.3 | 0.301 | 223 | |
| Low fence | 52.6% | +3.0 | 0.340 | 230 | |
| Rectangle | 51.0% | +1.3 | 0.690 | 208 | |
| Octagon | 47.8% | -1.9 | 0.601 | 182 | |
| Open | 47.2% | -2.4 | 0.521 | 163 | |
| Half fence | 46.5% | -3.2 | 0.325 | 211 | |
| Single wall | 46.3% | -3.3 | 0.334 | 190 | |
| Breakable full fence | 43.6% | -6.1 | 0.037 | 257 |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Lau's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 12.53 on 9 df, p 0.185
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 52.9%223 | +9.30.041 | +6.50.178 | -1.70.731 | +0.30.948 | +6.60.181 | -5.70.365 | +5.70.271 | +1.90.685 | +5.10.306 |
| Breakable full fence | -9.30.041 | 43.6%257 | -2.90.535 | -11.10.024 | -9.00.046 | -2.70.565 | -15.00.015 | -3.70.463 | -7.40.113 | -4.20.381 |
| Half fence | -6.50.178 | +2.90.535 | 46.5%211 | -8.20.110 | -6.20.196 | +0.10.979 | -12.20.056 | -0.80.879 | -4.50.355 | -1.40.788 |
| Breakable half fence | +1.70.731 | +11.10.024 | +8.20.110 | 54.6%172 | +2.00.685 | +8.30.113 | -4.00.543 | +7.40.175 | +3.70.473 | +6.80.198 |
| Low fence | -0.30.948 | +9.00.046 | +6.20.196 | -2.00.685 | 52.6%230 | +6.30.199 | -6.00.338 | +5.40.294 | +1.60.730 | +4.80.333 |
| Single wall | -6.60.181 | +2.70.565 | -0.10.979 | -8.30.113 | -6.30.199 | 46.3%190 | -12.30.057 | -0.90.862 | -4.60.354 | -1.50.774 |
| Fence and open | +5.70.365 | +15.00.015 | +12.20.056 | +4.00.543 | +6.00.338 | +12.30.057 | 58.6%87 | +11.40.086 | +7.70.229 | +10.80.097 |
| Open | -5.70.271 | +3.70.463 | +0.80.879 | -7.40.175 | -5.40.294 | +0.90.862 | -11.40.086 | 47.2%163 | -3.70.477 | -0.60.917 |
| Rectangle | -1.90.685 | +7.40.113 | +4.50.355 | -3.70.473 | -1.60.730 | +4.60.354 | -7.70.229 | +3.70.477 | 51.0%208 | +3.20.534 |
| Octagon | -5.10.306 | +4.20.381 | +1.40.788 | -6.80.198 | -4.80.333 | +1.50.774 | -10.80.097 | +0.60.917 | -3.20.534 | 47.8%182 |
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
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.
Matches counted1,009
Win rate54.7%
Widest swing-12.8 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23
Where it was fought
Lau's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere| Stage | Stage effect | Win % | Change | p | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Half fence | 63.2% | +8.4 | 0.054 | 114 | |
| Single wall | 62.8% | +8.0 | 0.085 | 102 | |
| Octagon | 61.8% | +7.0 | 0.131 | 102 | |
| Fence and open | 58.0% | +3.3 | 0.631 | 50 · | |
| Full fence | 55.3% | +0.6 | 0.910 | 85 | |
| Breakable half fence | 55.0% | +0.2 | 0.962 | 91 | |
| Breakable full fence | 54.1% | -0.6 | 0.898 | 109 | |
| Rectangle | 50.0% | -4.7 | 0.319 | 100 | |
| Low fence | 47.8% | -6.9 | 0.115 | 115 | |
| Open | 41.9% | -12.8 | 0.009 | 93 |
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
Stage against stage
Lau's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column'sAll ten shapes at once: chi-square 17.45 on 9 df, p 0.042
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 55.3%85 | +1.20.871 | -7.90.263 | +0.30.963 | +7.50.296 | -7.50.302 | -2.70.760 | +13.30.075 | +5.30.472 | -6.50.371 |
| Breakable full fence | -1.20.871 | 54.1%109 | -9.00.171 | -0.80.908 | +6.30.346 | -8.60.205 | -3.90.648 | +12.20.084 | +4.10.551 | -7.60.262 |
| Half fence | +7.90.263 | +9.00.171 | 63.2%114 | +8.20.234 | +15.30.020 | +0.40.950 | +5.20.532 | +21.20.002 | +13.20.052 | +1.40.833 |
| Breakable half fence | -0.30.963 | +0.80.908 | -8.20.234 | 55.0%91 | +7.10.310 | -7.80.271 | -3.00.727 | +13.00.077 | +5.00.494 | -6.80.337 |
| Low fence | -7.50.296 | -6.30.346 | -15.30.020 | -7.10.310 | 47.8%115 | -14.90.028 | -10.20.230 | +5.90.396 | -2.20.750 | -13.90.040 |
| Single wall | +7.50.302 | +8.60.205 | -0.40.950 | +7.80.271 | +14.90.028 | 62.8%102 | +4.80.573 | +20.80.004 | +12.80.068 | +1.00.885 |
| Fence and open | +2.70.760 | +3.90.648 | -5.20.532 | +3.00.727 | +10.20.230 | -4.80.573 | 58.0%50 | +16.10.067 | +8.00.355 | -3.80.655 |
| Open | -13.30.075 | -12.20.084 | -21.20.002 | -13.00.077 | -5.90.396 | -20.80.004 | -16.10.067 | 41.9%93 | -8.10.261 | -19.80.006 |
| Rectangle | -5.30.472 | -4.10.551 | -13.20.052 | -5.00.494 | +2.20.750 | -12.80.068 | -8.00.355 | +8.10.261 | 50.0%100 | -11.80.092 |
| Octagon | +6.50.371 | +7.60.262 | -1.40.833 | +6.80.337 | +13.90.040 | -1.00.885 | +3.80.655 | +19.80.006 | +11.80.092 | 61.8%102 |
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
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.