VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Shun vs Wolf

Shun vs Wolf in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Shun wins 49.5% of 6,275 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 counted6,275
Win rate49.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.5 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 fence52.5%+3.00.115621
Octagon52.3%+2.80.154589
Breakable full fence52.2%+2.80.156601
Open50.3%+0.80.665626
Low fence50.0%+0.50.785660
Full fence49.5%+0.00.982652
Single wall49.2%-0.30.895593
Fence and open49.1%-0.40.873320
Rectangle46.2%-3.30.075662
Half fence46.0%-3.50.066626
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 11.93 on 9 df, p 0.217

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.5%652-2.70.338+3.50.206-3.00.292-0.50.868+0.30.916+0.50.889-0.80.781+3.30.229-2.80.333
Breakable full fence+2.70.33852.2%601+6.20.029-0.20.930+2.20.425+3.00.299+3.20.357+1.90.500+6.00.032-0.00.987
Half fence-3.50.206-6.20.02946.0%626-6.50.022-4.00.152-3.20.258-3.00.373-4.30.127-0.20.938-6.30.028
Breakable half fence+3.00.292+0.20.930+6.50.02252.5%621+2.50.372+3.30.257+3.40.318+2.20.442+6.30.025+0.20.943
Low fence+0.50.868-2.20.425+4.00.152-2.50.37250.0%660+0.80.789+0.90.783-0.30.909+3.80.169-2.30.419
Single wall-0.30.916-3.00.299+3.20.258-3.30.257-0.80.78949.2%593+0.20.959-1.10.707+3.00.285-3.00.294
Fence and open-0.50.889-3.20.357+3.00.373-3.40.318-0.90.783-0.20.95949.1%320-1.30.714+2.80.404-3.20.352
Open+0.80.781-1.90.500+4.30.127-2.20.442+0.30.909+1.10.707+1.30.71450.3%626+4.10.141-2.00.492
Rectangle-3.30.229-6.00.032+0.20.938-6.30.025-3.80.169-3.00.285-2.80.404-4.10.14146.2%662-6.10.032
Octagon+2.80.333+0.00.987+6.30.028-0.20.943+2.30.419+3.00.294+3.20.352+2.00.492+6.10.03252.3%589
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 counted3,701
Win rate48.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.6 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
Octagon53.2%+4.60.070357
Full fence51.5%+2.90.252357
Breakable half fence49.9%+1.20.636353
Fence and open49.8%+1.10.753199
Breakable full fence49.5%+0.90.739327
Low fence49.4%+0.70.760403
Single wall47.9%-0.70.777338
Open47.1%-1.60.511397
Half fence46.1%-2.50.295390
Rectangle44.2%-4.40.064389
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 9.14 on 9 df, p 0.424

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.5%357+2.00.601+5.40.141+1.70.654+2.20.552+3.60.341+1.80.685+4.40.224+7.30.045-1.70.653
Breakable full fence-2.00.60149.5%327+3.40.366-0.30.934+0.20.965+1.60.678-0.20.963+2.40.514+5.30.155-3.70.336
Half fence-5.40.141-3.40.36646.1%390-3.70.313-3.20.363-1.80.632-3.60.409-0.90.790+1.90.587-7.10.054
Breakable half fence-1.70.654+0.30.934+3.70.31349.9%353+0.50.896+1.90.612+0.10.980+2.80.451+5.60.124-3.40.370
Low fence-2.20.552-0.20.965+3.20.363-0.50.89649.4%403+1.40.694-0.40.932+2.30.519+5.20.145-3.80.290
Single wall-3.60.341-1.60.678+1.80.632-1.90.612-1.40.69447.9%338-1.80.684+0.80.823+3.70.316-5.30.163
Fence and open-1.80.685+0.20.963+3.60.409-0.10.980+0.40.932+1.80.68449.8%199+2.60.542+5.50.203-3.50.432
Open-4.40.224-2.40.514+0.90.790-2.80.451-2.30.519-0.80.823-2.60.54247.1%397+2.90.417-6.10.093
Rectangle-7.30.045-5.30.155-1.90.587-5.60.124-5.20.145-3.70.316-5.50.203-2.90.41744.2%389-9.00.014
Octagon+1.70.653+3.70.336+7.10.054+3.40.370+3.80.290+5.30.163+3.50.432+6.10.093+9.00.01453.2%357
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 counted2,323
Win rate50.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches6.0 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 fence56.0%+6.00.045252
Open53.9%+3.90.238204
Breakable full fence53.7%+3.70.208259
Octagon51.2%+1.30.707201
Single wall50.6%+0.70.831235
Low fence50.4%+0.40.886240
Rectangle47.3%-2.60.382243
Full fence46.8%-3.20.269263
Fence and open45.0%-5.00.309100
Half fence44.8%-5.20.124203
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 11.28 on 9 df, p 0.257

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.8%263-6.90.115+1.90.677-9.20.037-3.60.413-3.90.388+1.80.763-7.20.125-0.60.900-4.50.339
Breakable full fence+6.90.11553.7%259+8.80.059-2.30.604+3.20.468+3.00.501+8.70.141-0.20.957+6.30.155+2.40.606
Half fence-1.90.677-8.80.05944.8%203-11.10.018-5.60.241-5.80.225-0.20.977-9.10.067-2.50.598-6.40.197
Breakable half fence+9.20.037+2.30.604+11.10.01856.0%252+5.50.219+5.30.240+10.90.063+2.00.665+8.60.055+4.70.318
Low fence+3.60.413-3.20.468+5.60.241-5.50.21950.4%240-0.20.961+5.40.363-3.50.461+3.10.497-0.80.863
Single wall+3.90.388-3.00.501+5.80.225-5.30.240+0.20.96150.6%235+5.60.345-3.30.492+3.30.469-0.60.900
Fence and open-1.80.763-8.70.141+0.20.977-10.90.063-5.40.363-5.60.34545.0%100-8.90.144-2.30.695-6.20.307
Open+7.20.125+0.20.957+9.10.067-2.00.665+3.50.461+3.30.492+8.90.14453.9%204+6.60.165+2.70.589
Rectangle+0.60.900-6.30.155+2.50.598-8.60.055-3.10.497-3.30.469+2.30.695-6.60.16547.3%243-3.90.411
Octagon+4.50.339-2.40.606+6.40.197-4.70.318+0.80.863+0.60.900+6.20.307-2.70.589+3.90.41151.2%201
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 counted251
Win rate57.4%
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
Breakable full fence86.7%+29.30.01815 ·
Open72.0%+14.60.11925 ·
Rectangle63.3%+6.00.48230 ·
Fence and open61.9%+4.50.66121 ·
Low fence58.8%+1.40.90017 ·
Breakable half fence56.2%-1.10.92516 ·
Single wall55.0%-2.40.82320 ·
Half fence51.5%-5.80.46533 ·
Full fence50.0%-7.40.36732 ·
Octagon48.4%-9.00.28031 ·
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 10.24 on 9 df, p 0.332

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%32-36.70.016-1.50.903-6.20.683-8.80.556-5.00.726-11.90.394-22.00.093-13.30.290+1.60.898
Breakable full fence+36.70.01686.7%15+35.10.020+30.40.062+27.90.080+31.70.046+24.80.102+14.70.282+23.30.104+38.30.013
Half fence+1.50.903-35.10.02051.5%33-4.70.755-7.30.623-3.50.805-10.40.454-20.50.114-11.80.344+3.10.802
Breakable half fence+6.20.683-30.40.062+4.70.75556.2%16-2.60.881+1.20.940-5.70.729-15.80.300-7.10.639+7.90.609
Low fence+8.80.556-27.90.080+7.30.623+2.60.88158.8%17+3.80.815-3.10.847-13.20.374-4.50.760+10.40.489
Single wall+5.00.726-31.70.046+3.50.805-1.20.940-3.80.81555.0%20-6.90.654-17.00.236-8.30.556+6.60.645
Fence and open+11.90.394-24.80.102+10.40.454+5.70.729+3.10.847+6.90.65461.9%21-10.10.467-1.40.917+13.50.337
Open+22.00.093-14.70.282+20.50.114+15.80.300+13.20.374+17.00.236+10.10.46772.0%25+8.70.495+23.60.074
Rectangle+13.30.290-23.30.104+11.80.344+7.10.639+4.50.760+8.30.556+1.40.917-8.70.49563.3%30+14.90.240
Octagon-1.60.898-38.30.013-3.10.802-7.90.609-10.40.489-6.60.645-13.50.337-23.60.074-14.90.24048.4%31
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.