Virtua Fighter 5 REVO · v1.10 · Character Matchup Winrates
Lau vs Taka
Matches counted913
Win rate49.3%
Widest swing-8.0 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 56.0% | +6.7 | 0.200 | 84 | |
| Rectangle | 54.6% | +5.3 | 0.265 | 97 | |
| Open | 54.2% | +4.9 | 0.346 | 83 | |
| Fence and open | 52.4% | +3.1 | 0.681 | 42 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 51.0% | +1.7 | 0.717 | 98 | |
| Low fence | 49.5% | +0.3 | 0.953 | 111 | |
| Single wall | 49.5% | +0.2 | 0.967 | 97 | |
| Breakable full fence | 44.8% | -4.5 | 0.382 | 87 | |
| Octagon | 44.1% | -5.2 | 0.290 | 93 | |
| Half fence | 41.3% | -8.0 | 0.150 | 75 · |
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 7.23 on 9 df, p 0.613
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 56.0%84 | +11.10.146 | +14.60.066 | +4.90.506 | +6.40.375 | +6.50.385 | +3.60.704 | +1.70.822 | +1.30.859 | +11.90.115 |
| Breakable full fence | -11.10.146 | 44.8%87 | +3.50.654 | -6.20.400 | -4.70.509 | -4.70.528 | -7.50.421 | -9.40.221 | -9.80.184 | +0.70.920 |
| Half fence | -14.60.066 | -3.50.654 | 41.3%75 | -9.70.206 | -8.20.270 | -8.20.287 | -11.10.249 | -12.90.106 | -13.30.083 | -2.80.720 |
| Breakable half fence | -4.90.506 | +6.20.400 | +9.70.206 | 51.0%98 | +1.50.832 | +1.50.830 | -1.40.883 | -3.20.668 | -3.60.613 | +6.90.338 |
| Low fence | -6.40.375 | +4.70.509 | +8.20.270 | -1.50.832 | 49.5%111 | +0.10.993 | -2.80.755 | -4.70.520 | -5.10.464 | +5.50.436 |
| Single wall | -6.50.385 | +4.70.528 | +8.20.287 | -1.50.830 | -0.10.993 | 49.5%97 | -2.90.754 | -4.70.527 | -5.20.472 | +5.40.456 |
| Fence and open | -3.60.704 | +7.50.421 | +11.10.249 | +1.40.883 | +2.80.755 | +2.90.754 | 52.4%42 | -1.80.846 | -2.30.806 | +8.30.371 |
| Open | -1.70.822 | +9.40.221 | +12.90.106 | +3.20.668 | +4.70.520 | +4.70.527 | +1.80.846 | 54.2%83 | -0.40.955 | +10.10.180 |
| Rectangle | -1.30.859 | +9.80.184 | +13.30.083 | +3.60.613 | +5.10.464 | +5.20.472 | +2.30.806 | +0.40.955 | 54.6%97 | +10.60.146 |
| Octagon | -11.90.115 | -0.70.920 | +2.80.720 | -6.90.338 | -5.50.436 | -5.40.456 | -8.30.371 | -10.10.180 | -10.60.146 | 44.1%93 |
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 counted664
Win rate48.2%
Widest swing-10.3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fence and open | 58.3% | +10.1 | 0.211 | 36 · | |
| Open | 56.2% | +8.1 | 0.246 | 48 · | |
| Full fence | 53.9% | +5.7 | 0.337 | 65 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 51.4% | +3.2 | 0.564 | 74 · | |
| Rectangle | 50.7% | +2.5 | 0.654 | 71 · | |
| Octagon | 47.5% | -0.7 | 0.915 | 61 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 46.8% | -1.4 | 0.814 | 62 · | |
| Single wall | 46.1% | -2.0 | 0.701 | 78 · | |
| Low fence | 41.0% | -7.2 | 0.178 | 78 · | |
| Half fence | 37.9% | -10.3 | 0.102 | 58 · |
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 8.27 on 9 df, p 0.507
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 53.9%65 | +7.10.426 | +15.90.077 | +2.50.769 | +12.80.126 | +7.70.360 | -4.50.664 | -2.40.800 | +3.10.714 | +6.30.479 |
| Breakable full fence | -7.10.426 | 46.8%62 | +8.80.327 | -4.60.595 | +5.70.496 | +0.60.942 | -11.60.270 | -9.50.324 | -3.90.651 | -0.80.932 |
| Half fence | -15.90.077 | -8.80.327 | 37.9%58 | -13.40.124 | -3.10.715 | -8.20.338 | -20.40.054 | -18.30.060 | -12.80.147 | -9.60.290 |
| Breakable half fence | -2.50.769 | +4.60.595 | +13.40.124 | 51.4%74 | +10.30.202 | +5.20.522 | -7.00.491 | -4.90.596 | +0.70.938 | +3.80.659 |
| Low fence | -12.80.126 | -5.70.496 | +3.10.715 | -10.30.202 | 41.0%78 | -5.10.518 | -17.30.085 | -15.20.096 | -9.70.236 | -6.50.442 |
| Single wall | -7.70.360 | -0.60.942 | +8.20.338 | -5.20.522 | +5.10.518 | 46.1%78 | -12.20.227 | -10.10.271 | -4.50.579 | -1.40.871 |
| Fence and open | +4.50.664 | +11.60.270 | +20.40.054 | +7.00.491 | +17.30.085 | +12.20.227 | 58.3%36 | +2.10.849 | +7.60.455 | +10.80.304 |
| Open | +2.40.800 | +9.50.324 | +18.30.060 | +4.90.596 | +15.20.096 | +10.10.271 | -2.10.849 | 56.2%48 | +5.50.552 | +8.70.366 |
| Rectangle | -3.10.714 | +3.90.651 | +12.80.147 | -0.70.938 | +9.70.236 | +4.50.579 | -7.60.455 | -5.50.552 | 50.7%71 | +3.20.717 |
| Octagon | -6.30.479 | +0.80.932 | +9.60.290 | -3.80.659 | +6.50.442 | +1.40.871 | -10.80.304 | -8.70.366 | -3.20.717 | 47.5%61 |
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 counted249
Win rate52.2%
Widest swing-35.5 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 | 69.7% | +17.5 | 0.031 | 33 · | |
| Rectangle | 65.4% | +13.2 | 0.155 | 26 · | |
| Full fence | 63.2% | +10.9 | 0.320 | 19 · | |
| Single wall | 63.2% | +10.9 | 0.320 | 19 · | |
| Half fence | 52.9% | +0.7 | 0.950 | 17 · | |
| Open | 51.4% | -0.8 | 0.921 | 35 · | |
| Breakable half fence | 50.0% | -2.2 | 0.820 | 24 · | |
| Breakable full fence | 40.0% | -12.2 | 0.198 | 25 · | |
| Octagon | 37.5% | -14.7 | 0.074 | 32 · | |
| Fence and open | 16.7% | -35.5 | 0.078 | 6 · |
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 14.95 on 9 df, p 0.092
| Stage | Full | Break. full | Half | Break. half | Low | Wall | Mixed | Open | Rect | Oct |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full fence | 63.2%19 | +23.20.128 | +10.20.535 | +13.20.388 | -6.50.628 | +0.01.000 | +46.50.047 | +11.70.407 | -2.20.878 | +25.70.076 |
| Breakable full fence | -23.20.128 | 40.0%25 | -12.90.408 | -10.00.482 | -29.70.024 | -23.20.128 | +23.30.283 | -11.40.382 | -25.40.069 | +2.50.847 |
| Half fence | -10.20.535 | +12.90.408 | 52.9%17 | +2.90.853 | -16.80.242 | -10.20.535 | +36.30.123 | +1.50.918 | -12.40.415 | +15.40.299 |
| Breakable half fence | -13.20.388 | +10.00.482 | -2.90.853 | 50.0%24 | -19.70.132 | -13.20.388 | +33.30.141 | -1.40.914 | -15.40.271 | +12.50.350 |
| Low fence | +6.50.628 | +29.70.024 | +16.80.242 | +19.70.132 | 69.7%33 | +6.50.628 | +53.00.014 | +18.30.124 | +4.30.725 | +32.20.009 |
| Single wall | -0.01.000 | +23.20.128 | +10.20.535 | +13.20.388 | -6.50.628 | 63.2%19 | +46.50.047 | +11.70.407 | -2.20.878 | +25.70.076 |
| Fence and open | -46.50.047 | -23.30.283 | -36.30.123 | -33.30.141 | -53.00.014 | -46.50.047 | 16.7%6 | -34.80.115 | -48.70.030 | -20.80.324 |
| Open | -11.70.407 | +11.40.382 | -1.50.918 | +1.40.914 | -18.30.124 | -11.70.407 | +34.80.115 | 51.4%35 | -13.90.276 | +13.90.252 |
| Rectangle | +2.20.878 | +25.40.069 | +12.40.415 | +15.40.271 | -4.30.725 | +2.20.878 | +48.70.030 | +13.90.276 | 65.4%26 | +27.90.035 |
| Octagon | -25.70.076 | -2.50.847 | -15.40.299 | -12.50.350 | -32.20.009 | -25.70.076 | +20.80.324 | -13.90.252 | -27.90.035 | 37.5%32 |
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.