VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Shun vs Vanessa

Shun vs Vanessa in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Shun wins 51.5% of 3,100 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 counted3,100
Win rate51.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches8.4 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
Fence and open60.0%+8.40.028160
Breakable half fence57.0%+5.40.051295
Half fence54.4%+2.90.272329
Rectangle51.3%-0.20.929306
Octagon51.1%-0.40.870315
Low fence51.0%-0.50.857288
Full fence49.3%-2.20.418302
Open49.2%-2.30.376329
Single wall48.2%-3.40.217303
Breakable full fence46.6%-5.00.074294
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 14.69 on 9 df, p 0.100

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.3%302+2.70.503-5.10.203-7.60.062-1.70.679+1.20.777-10.70.029+0.10.980-2.00.627-1.80.660
Breakable full fence-2.70.50346.6%294-7.80.052-10.30.012-4.40.284-1.60.698-13.40.006-2.60.510-4.70.249-4.50.266
Half fence+5.10.203+7.80.05254.4%329-2.50.523+3.40.403+6.20.118-5.60.242+5.20.185+3.10.434+3.30.402
Breakable half fence+7.60.062+10.30.012+2.50.52357.0%295+5.90.152+8.80.032-3.00.529+7.70.054+5.60.165+5.80.148
Low fence+1.70.679+4.40.284-3.40.403-5.90.15251.0%288+2.90.487-9.00.068+1.80.655-0.30.948-0.10.986
Single wall-1.20.777+1.60.698-6.20.118-8.80.032-2.90.48748.2%303-11.80.015-1.10.791-3.10.441-2.90.467
Fence and open+10.70.029+13.40.006+5.60.242+3.00.529+9.00.068+11.80.01560.0%160+10.80.025+8.70.074+8.90.066
Open-0.10.980+2.60.510-5.20.185-7.70.054-1.80.655+1.10.791-10.80.02549.2%329-2.10.603-1.90.635
Rectangle+2.00.627+4.70.249-3.10.434-5.60.165+0.30.948+3.10.441-8.70.074+2.10.60351.3%306+0.20.961
Octagon+1.80.660+4.50.266-3.30.402-5.80.148+0.10.986+2.90.467-8.90.066+1.90.635-0.20.96151.1%315
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 counted1,377
Win rate51.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches5.7 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
Fence and open63.4%+11.50.04771 ·
Breakable half fence57.6%+5.70.172132
Open53.7%+1.70.636164
Octagon53.4%+1.50.716131
Half fence52.7%+0.80.835146
Single wall51.8%-0.20.970114
Full fence49.6%-2.30.570139
Rectangle47.9%-4.00.309144
Low fence47.4%-4.50.269135
Breakable full fence46.4%-5.50.195125
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 9.63 on 9 df, p 0.382

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.6%139+3.20.599-3.10.601-7.90.190+2.20.712-2.10.738-13.70.059-4.00.485+1.70.772-3.80.533
Breakable full fence-3.20.59946.4%125-6.30.298-11.20.073-1.00.871-5.30.408-17.00.022-7.30.221-1.50.804-7.00.260
Half fence+3.10.601+6.30.29852.7%146-4.80.418+5.30.372+1.00.875-10.60.138-0.90.871+4.80.411-0.70.908
Breakable half fence+7.90.190+11.20.073+4.80.41857.6%132+10.20.096+5.80.360-5.80.422+3.90.500+9.70.108+4.10.499
Low fence-2.20.712+1.00.871-5.30.372-10.20.09647.4%135-4.30.494-16.00.029-6.20.282-0.50.932-6.00.326
Single wall+2.10.738+5.30.408-1.00.875-5.80.360+4.30.49451.8%114-11.60.121-1.90.754+3.80.540-1.70.793
Fence and open+13.70.059+17.00.022+10.60.138+5.80.422+16.00.029+11.60.12163.4%71+9.70.167+15.50.033+9.90.173
Open+4.00.485+7.30.221+0.90.871-3.90.500+6.20.282+1.90.754-9.70.16753.7%164+5.70.315+0.20.970
Rectangle-1.70.772+1.50.804-4.80.411-9.70.108+0.50.932-3.80.540-15.50.033-5.70.31547.9%144-5.50.361
Octagon+3.80.533+7.00.260+0.70.908-4.10.499+6.00.326+1.70.793-9.90.173-0.20.970+5.50.36153.4%131
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 counted1,307
Win rate51.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-11.7 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
Breakable half fence59.3%+8.10.071113
Rectangle58.1%+7.00.096129
Half fence55.8%+4.60.237147
Fence and open55.6%+4.40.47763 ·
Low fence53.6%+2.40.597112
Full fence51.1%-0.10.982137
Octagon49.6%-1.60.709125
Breakable full fence45.5%-5.70.187123
Single wall44.7%-6.50.090150
Open39.5%-11.70.009114
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 17.95 on 9 df, p 0.036

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.1%137+5.60.370-4.70.429-8.20.195-2.50.697+6.40.276-4.50.557+11.60.066-7.00.249+1.50.809
Breakable full fence-5.60.37045.5%123-10.20.093-13.80.034-8.00.218+0.90.887-10.00.195+6.10.346-12.60.045-4.10.521
Half fence+4.70.429+10.20.09355.8%147-3.50.571+2.20.723+11.10.055+0.20.976+16.30.009-2.40.693+6.20.309
Breakable half fence+8.20.195+13.80.034+3.50.57159.3%113+5.70.387+14.60.019+3.70.630+19.80.003+1.10.856+9.70.134
Low fence+2.50.697+8.00.218-2.20.723-5.70.38753.6%112+8.90.154-2.00.800+14.10.034-4.60.476+4.00.541
Single wall-6.40.276-0.90.887-11.10.055-14.60.019-8.90.15444.7%150-10.90.147+5.20.398-13.50.025-4.90.414
Fence and open+4.50.557+10.00.195-0.20.976-3.70.630+2.00.800+10.90.14755.6%63+16.10.040-2.60.734+6.00.441
Open-11.60.066-6.10.346-16.30.009-19.80.003-14.10.034-5.20.398-16.10.04039.5%114-18.70.004-10.10.116
Rectangle+7.00.249+12.60.045+2.40.693-1.10.856+4.60.476+13.50.025+2.60.734+18.70.00458.1%129+8.50.172
Octagon-1.50.809+4.10.521-6.20.309-9.70.134-4.00.541+4.90.414-6.00.441+10.10.116-8.50.17249.6%125
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 counted416
Win rate51.4%
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
Fence and open61.5%+10.10.28726 ·
Open56.9%+5.40.40851 ·
Low fence56.1%+4.70.53041 ·
Half fence55.6%+4.10.60536 ·
Single wall51.3%-0.20.98339 ·
Breakable full fence50.0%-1.40.83646 ·
Breakable half fence50.0%-1.40.82850 ·
Octagon49.1%-2.30.70459 ·
Rectangle39.4%-12.10.14933 ·
Full fence38.5%-13.00.17126 ·
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 6.12 on 9 df, p 0.728

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence38.5%26-11.50.345-17.10.184-11.50.338-17.60.159-12.80.310-23.10.096-18.40.127-0.90.942-10.70.362
Breakable full fence+11.50.34550.0%46-5.60.617+0.01.000-6.10.570-1.30.906-11.50.345-6.90.499+10.60.351+0.80.931
Half fence+17.10.184+5.60.61755.6%36+5.60.611-0.50.962+4.30.711-6.00.638-1.30.904+16.20.179+6.40.545
Breakable half fence+11.50.338-0.01.000-5.60.61150.0%50-6.10.562-1.30.904-11.50.338-6.90.489+10.60.343+0.80.930
Low fence+17.60.159+6.10.570+0.50.962+6.10.56256.1%41+4.80.666-5.40.660-0.80.941+16.70.153+7.00.494
Single wall+12.80.310+1.30.906-4.30.711+1.30.904-4.80.66651.3%39-10.30.415-5.60.598+11.90.313+2.10.836
Fence and open+23.10.096+11.50.345+6.00.638+11.50.338+5.40.660+10.30.41561.5%26+4.70.694+22.10.091+12.40.292
Open+18.40.127+6.90.499+1.30.904+6.90.489+0.80.941+5.60.598-4.70.69456.9%51+17.50.118+7.70.419
Rectangle+0.90.942-10.60.351-16.20.179-10.60.343-16.70.153-11.90.313-22.10.091-17.50.11839.4%33-9.80.367
Octagon+10.70.362-0.80.931-6.40.545-0.80.930-7.00.494-2.10.836-12.40.292-7.70.419+9.80.36749.1%59
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.