Virtua Fighter 5 REVO · v1.10 · Character Matchup Winrates
Lau vs Pai
Matches counted2,486
Win rate51.6%
Widest swing-6.1 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 55.0% | +3.4 | 0.278 | 229 | |
| Low fence | 53.2% | +1.6 | 0.591 | 248 | |
| Open | 53.2% | +1.6 | 0.605 | 233 | |
| Single wall | 52.4% | +0.8 | 0.797 | 227 | |
| Octagon | 52.2% | +0.6 | 0.850 | 253 | |
| Rectangle | 51.4% | -0.2 | 0.943 | 251 | |
| Half fence | 50.6% | -1.0 | 0.754 | 235 | |
| Breakable full fence | 50.2% | -1.4 | 0.598 | 295 | |
| Breakable half fence | 48.8% | -2.8 | 0.306 | 297 | |
| Fence and open | 45.5% | -6.1 | 0.188 | 112 |
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 4.56 on 9 df, p 0.871
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 55.0%229 | +4.80.270 | +4.40.344 | +6.20.158 | +1.80.694 | +2.60.578 | +9.50.100 | +1.80.697 | +3.60.426 | +2.90.531 |
| Breakable full fence | -4.80.270 | 50.2%295 | -0.50.915 | +1.40.743 | -3.10.478 | -2.20.610 | +4.60.404 | -3.00.486 | -1.20.775 | -2.00.640 |
| Half fence | -4.40.344 | +0.50.915 | 50.6%235 | +1.80.677 | -2.60.569 | -1.80.701 | +5.10.374 | -2.60.576 | -0.80.868 | -1.50.735 |
| Breakable half fence | -6.20.158 | -1.40.743 | -1.80.677 | 48.8%297 | -4.40.306 | -3.60.414 | +3.30.553 | -4.40.315 | -2.60.548 | -3.40.433 |
| Low fence | -1.80.694 | +3.10.478 | +2.60.569 | +4.40.306 | 53.2%248 | +0.80.861 | +7.70.177 | +0.00.999 | +1.80.682 | +1.10.814 |
| Single wall | -2.60.578 | +2.20.610 | +1.80.701 | +3.60.414 | -0.80.861 | 52.4%227 | +6.90.233 | -0.80.864 | +1.00.822 | +0.20.957 |
| Fence and open | -9.50.100 | -4.60.404 | -5.10.374 | -3.30.553 | -7.70.177 | -6.90.233 | 45.5%112 | -7.70.181 | -5.80.302 | -6.60.242 |
| Open | -1.80.697 | +3.00.486 | +2.60.576 | +4.40.315 | -0.00.999 | +0.80.864 | +7.70.181 | 53.2%233 | +1.80.688 | +1.10.818 |
| Rectangle | -3.60.426 | +1.20.775 | +0.80.868 | +2.60.548 | -1.80.682 | -1.00.822 | +5.80.302 | -1.80.688 | 51.4%251 | -0.80.861 |
| Octagon | -2.90.531 | +2.00.640 | +1.50.735 | +3.40.433 | -1.10.814 | -0.20.957 | +6.60.242 | -1.10.818 | +0.80.861 | 52.2%253 |
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 counted1,818
Win rate50.5%
Widest swing-8.2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low fence | 54.6% | +4.1 | 0.236 | 183 | |
| Half fence | 53.7% | +3.2 | 0.350 | 188 | |
| Rectangle | 52.4% | +1.9 | 0.611 | 170 | |
| Open | 52.0% | +1.5 | 0.681 | 179 | |
| Full fence | 51.8% | +1.3 | 0.728 | 170 | |
| Single wall | 51.8% | +1.3 | 0.728 | 170 | |
| Octagon | 50.3% | -0.2 | 0.958 | 167 | |
| Breakable full fence | 45.9% | -4.7 | 0.133 | 229 | |
| Breakable half fence | 45.7% | -4.8 | 0.139 | 208 | |
| Fence and open | 42.2% | -8.2 | 0.157 | 71 · |
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 8.47 on 9 df, p 0.488
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 51.8%170 | +5.90.242 | -2.00.711 | +6.10.238 | -2.90.588 | +0.01.000 | +9.50.178 | -0.20.972 | -0.60.914 | +1.50.788 |
| Breakable full fence | -5.90.242 | 45.9%229 | -7.90.110 | +0.20.970 | -8.80.076 | -5.90.242 | +3.60.594 | -6.10.221 | -6.50.199 | -4.50.382 |
| Half fence | +2.00.711 | +7.90.110 | 53.7%188 | +8.10.110 | -0.90.859 | +2.00.711 | +11.50.100 | +1.80.734 | +1.40.795 | +3.40.519 |
| Breakable half fence | -6.10.238 | -0.20.970 | -8.10.110 | 45.7%208 | -9.00.077 | -6.10.238 | +3.40.617 | -6.30.218 | -6.70.196 | -4.60.373 |
| Low fence | +2.90.588 | +8.80.076 | +0.90.859 | +9.00.077 | 54.6%183 | +2.90.588 | +12.40.076 | +2.70.608 | +2.30.666 | +4.30.416 |
| Single wall | -0.01.000 | +5.90.242 | -2.00.711 | +6.10.238 | -2.90.588 | 51.8%170 | +9.50.178 | -0.20.972 | -0.60.914 | +1.50.788 |
| Fence and open | -9.50.178 | -3.60.594 | -11.50.100 | -3.40.617 | -12.40.076 | -9.50.178 | 42.2%71 | -9.70.166 | -10.10.153 | -8.10.256 |
| Open | +0.20.972 | +6.10.221 | -1.80.734 | +6.30.218 | -2.70.608 | +0.20.972 | +9.70.166 | 52.0%179 | -0.40.941 | +1.70.758 |
| Rectangle | +0.60.914 | +6.50.199 | -1.40.795 | +6.70.196 | -2.30.666 | +0.60.914 | +10.10.153 | +0.40.941 | 52.4%170 | +2.00.706 |
| Octagon | -1.50.788 | +4.50.382 | -3.40.519 | +4.60.373 | -4.30.416 | -1.50.788 | +8.10.256 | -1.70.758 | -2.00.706 | 50.3%167 |
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 counted668
Win rate54.6%
Widest swing-16.3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breakable full fence | 65.2% | +10.5 | 0.071 | 66 · | |
| Full fence | 64.4% | +9.8 | 0.115 | 59 · | |
| Open | 57.4% | +2.8 | 0.670 | 54 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 56.2% | +1.5 | 0.754 | 89 | |
| Octagon | 55.8% | +1.2 | 0.815 | 86 | |
| Single wall | 54.4% | -0.2 | 0.968 | 57 · | |
| Fence and open | 51.2% | -3.4 | 0.650 | 41 · | |
| Rectangle | 49.4% | -5.3 | 0.311 | 81 | |
| Low fence | 49.2% | -5.4 | 0.356 | 65 · | |
| Half fence | 38.3% | -16.3 | 0.020 | 47 · |
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 12.44 on 9 df, p 0.190
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 64.4%59 | -0.70.931 | +26.10.007 | +8.20.318 | +15.20.089 | +10.00.272 | +13.20.187 | +7.00.446 | +15.00.077 | +8.60.301 |
| Breakable full fence | +0.70.931 | 65.2%66 | +26.90.005 | +9.00.260 | +15.90.066 | +10.80.224 | +13.90.153 | +7.70.385 | +15.80.055 | +9.30.244 |
| Half fence | -26.10.007 | -26.90.005 | 38.3%47 | -17.90.047 | -10.90.251 | -16.10.102 | -12.90.224 | -19.10.055 | -11.10.225 | -17.50.053 |
| Breakable half fence | -8.20.318 | -9.00.260 | +17.90.047 | 56.2%89 | +7.00.393 | +1.80.832 | +5.00.598 | -1.20.886 | +6.80.375 | +0.40.961 |
| Low fence | -15.20.089 | -15.90.066 | +10.90.251 | -7.00.393 | 49.2%65 | -5.20.570 | -2.00.842 | -8.20.374 | -0.10.985 | -6.60.422 |
| Single wall | -10.00.272 | -10.80.224 | +16.10.102 | -1.80.832 | +5.20.570 | 54.4%57 | +3.20.757 | -3.00.749 | +5.00.563 | -1.40.866 |
| Fence and open | -13.20.187 | -13.90.153 | +12.90.224 | -5.00.598 | +2.00.842 | -3.20.757 | 51.2%41 | -6.20.548 | +1.80.848 | -4.60.627 |
| Open | -7.00.446 | -7.70.385 | +19.10.055 | +1.20.886 | +8.20.374 | +3.00.749 | +6.20.548 | 57.4%54 | +8.00.360 | +1.60.853 |
| Rectangle | -15.00.077 | -15.80.055 | +11.10.225 | -6.80.375 | +0.10.985 | -5.00.563 | -1.80.848 | -8.00.360 | 49.4%81 | -6.40.405 |
| Octagon | -8.60.301 | -9.30.244 | +17.50.053 | -0.40.961 | +6.60.422 | +1.40.866 | +4.60.627 | -1.60.853 | +6.40.405 | 55.8%86 |
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.