VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Shun vs Taka

Shun vs Taka in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Shun wins 46.1% of 1,802 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 counted1,802
Win rate46.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches5.6 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Shun's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Half fence51.7%+5.60.152147
Full fence50.3%+4.20.233179
Breakable half fence48.2%+2.10.525195
Breakable full fence46.8%+0.70.836186
Open46.6%+0.50.870219
Single wall46.1%+0.01.000165
Low fence44.9%-1.20.769136
Rectangle44.0%-2.00.558184
Octagon43.3%-2.70.439180
Fence and open43.3%-2.80.57597
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 4.59 on 9 df, p 0.869

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.3%179+3.50.503-1.40.798+2.10.689+5.40.340+4.20.434+7.00.268+3.70.462+6.30.232+7.00.187
Breakable full fence-3.50.50346.8%186-4.90.372-1.40.780+1.90.733+0.70.894+3.50.577+0.20.968+2.80.595+3.40.508
Half fence+1.40.798+4.90.37251.7%147+3.50.522+6.80.249+5.60.320+8.40.199+5.10.336+7.70.164+8.40.132
Breakable half fence-2.10.689+1.40.780-3.50.52248.2%195+3.40.548+2.10.685+4.90.429+1.60.740+4.20.414+4.90.344
Low fence-5.40.340-1.90.733-6.80.249-3.40.54844.9%136-1.20.834+1.60.814-1.70.752+0.80.882+1.50.788
Single wall-4.20.434-0.70.894-5.60.320-2.10.685+1.20.83446.1%165+2.80.664-0.50.920+2.00.702+2.70.611
Fence and open-7.00.268-3.50.577-8.40.199-4.90.429-1.60.814-2.80.66443.3%97-3.30.590-0.70.908-0.00.996
Open-3.70.462-0.20.968-5.10.336-1.60.740+1.70.752+0.50.920+3.30.59046.6%219+2.60.608+3.20.517
Rectangle-6.30.232-2.80.595-7.70.164-4.20.414-0.80.882-2.00.702+0.70.908-2.60.60844.0%184+0.70.895
Octagon-7.00.187-3.40.508-8.40.132-4.90.344-1.50.788-2.70.611+0.00.996-3.20.517-0.70.89543.3%180
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 counted882
Win rate46.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches8.1 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Shun's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable full fence54.7%+8.10.09295
Half fence51.7%+5.10.31089
Open47.1%+0.50.921102
Full fence46.5%-0.10.97799
Octagon45.9%-0.70.88985
Breakable half fence45.8%-0.80.87683
Fence and open45.6%-0.90.89546 ·
Single wall45.2%-1.40.81462 ·
Rectangle44.1%-2.50.60893
Low fence40.8%-5.80.28876 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 4.78 on 9 df, p 0.853

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.5%99-8.30.249-5.20.475+0.70.927+5.70.453+1.30.872+0.80.927-0.60.933+2.40.741+0.60.937
Breakable full fence+8.30.24954.7%95+3.00.678+9.00.233+13.90.070+9.60.241+9.10.311+7.70.281+10.70.144+8.90.236
Half fence+5.20.475-3.00.67851.7%89+5.90.439+10.90.162+6.50.430+6.00.506+4.60.523+7.60.305+5.80.444
Breakable half fence-0.70.927-9.00.233-5.90.43945.8%83+5.00.526+0.60.941+0.10.989-1.30.863+1.70.821-0.10.990
Low fence-5.70.453-13.90.070-10.90.162-5.00.52640.8%76-4.40.606-4.90.599-6.30.405-3.30.666-5.10.515
Single wall-1.30.872-9.60.241-6.50.430-0.60.941+4.40.60645.2%62-0.50.960-1.90.813+1.10.895-0.70.931
Fence and open-0.80.927-9.10.311-6.00.506-0.10.989+4.90.599+0.50.96045.6%46-1.40.874+1.60.861-0.20.980
Open+0.60.933-7.70.281-4.60.523+1.30.863+6.30.405+1.90.813+1.40.87447.1%102+3.00.677+1.20.872
Rectangle-2.40.741-10.70.144-7.60.305-1.70.821+3.30.666-1.10.895-1.60.861-3.00.67744.1%93-1.80.810
Octagon-0.60.937-8.90.236-5.80.444+0.10.990+5.10.515+0.70.931+0.20.980-1.20.872+1.80.81045.9%85
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 counted713
Win rate45.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.7 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Shun's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Half fence54.2%+8.30.23248 ·
Full fence50.9%+5.10.44053 ·
Breakable half fence50.6%+4.70.34787
Single wall50.0%+4.10.43180
Low fence48.8%+3.00.68643 ·
Fence and open48.6%+2.70.74235 ·
Octagon46.1%+0.30.95678 ·
Open44.7%-1.20.80594
Rectangle41.3%-4.50.40575 ·
Breakable full fence36.8%-9.10.11368 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 6.19 on 9 df, p 0.721

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.9%53+14.20.118-3.20.746+0.40.966+2.10.837+0.90.915+2.40.828+6.30.465+9.60.282+4.80.590
Breakable full fence-14.20.11836.8%68-17.40.063-13.80.086-12.10.208-13.20.106-11.80.248-7.90.313-4.60.576-9.40.251
Half fence+3.20.746+17.40.06354.2%48+3.60.689+5.30.612+4.20.648+5.60.614+9.50.284+12.80.164+8.00.382
Breakable half fence-0.40.966+13.80.086-3.60.68950.6%87+1.70.852+0.60.941+2.00.841+5.90.428+9.20.240+4.40.571
Low fence-2.10.837+12.10.208-5.30.612-1.70.85248.8%43-1.20.902+0.30.981+4.20.651+7.50.429+2.70.777
Single wall-0.90.915+13.20.106-4.20.648-0.60.941+1.20.90250.0%80+1.40.888+5.30.484+8.70.279+3.90.629
Fence and open-2.40.828+11.80.248-5.60.614-2.00.841-0.30.981-1.40.88848.6%35+3.90.693+7.20.476+2.40.812
Open-6.30.465+7.90.313-9.50.284-5.90.428-4.20.651-5.30.484-3.90.69344.7%94+3.40.662-1.50.847
Rectangle-9.60.282+4.60.576-12.80.164-9.20.240-7.50.429-8.70.279-7.20.476-3.40.66241.3%75-4.80.548
Octagon-4.80.590+9.40.251-8.00.382-4.40.571-2.70.777-3.90.629-2.40.812+1.50.847+4.80.54846.1%78
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 counted207
Win rate44.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Shun's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Full fence63.0%+18.50.03827 ·
Rectangle56.2%+11.80.32316 ·
Low fence52.9%+8.50.46217 ·
Open52.2%+7.70.42923 ·
Breakable half fence48.0%+3.60.70325 ·
Breakable full fence43.5%-1.00.92123 ·
Half fence40.0%-4.40.77210 ·
Single wall34.8%-9.70.32323 ·
Fence and open25.0%-19.40.10316 ·
Octagon17.6%-26.80.02017 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 14.17 on 9 df, p 0.116

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence63.0%27+19.50.168+23.00.211+15.00.278+10.00.510+28.20.047+38.00.016+10.80.441+6.70.663+45.30.003
Breakable full fence-19.50.16843.5%23+3.50.853-4.50.753-9.50.554+8.70.546+18.50.237-8.70.555-12.80.433+25.80.085
Half fence-23.00.211-3.50.85340.0%10-8.00.668-12.90.516+5.20.775+15.00.420-12.20.520-16.20.420+22.40.201
Breakable half fence-15.00.278+4.50.753+8.00.66848.0%25-4.90.753+13.20.353+23.00.141-4.20.773-8.20.606+30.40.044
Low fence-10.00.510+9.50.554+12.90.516+4.90.75352.9%17+18.20.251+27.90.101+0.80.962-3.30.849+35.30.031
Single wall-28.20.047-8.70.546-5.20.775-13.20.353-18.20.25134.8%23+9.80.515-17.40.234-21.50.184+17.10.230
Fence and open-38.00.016-18.50.237-15.00.420-23.00.141-27.90.101-9.80.51525.0%16-27.20.090-31.20.072+7.30.606
Open-10.80.441+8.70.555+12.20.520+4.20.773-0.80.962+17.40.234+27.20.09052.2%23-4.10.802+34.50.026
Rectangle-6.70.663+12.80.433+16.20.420+8.20.606+3.30.849+21.50.184+31.20.072+4.10.80256.2%16+38.60.021
Octagon-45.30.003-25.80.085-22.40.201-30.40.044-35.30.031-17.10.230-7.30.606-34.50.026-38.60.02117.6%17
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.