VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Goh vs Jacky

Goh vs Jacky in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Goh wins 49.6% of 8,847 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 counted8,847
Win rate49.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.3 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Goh's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Open52.2%+2.60.104908
Fence and open51.3%+1.60.508388
Single wall51.0%+1.40.391908
Octagon50.8%+1.10.473896
Half fence50.3%+0.70.691813
Full fence50.0%+0.40.792929
Rectangle49.1%-0.50.766824
Low fence48.3%-1.30.409906
Breakable half fence47.5%-2.10.179876
Breakable full fence46.3%-3.30.034911
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 10.46 on 9 df, p 0.315

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%929+3.70.109-0.30.916+2.60.276+1.70.464-0.90.688-1.20.683-2.10.357+0.90.706-0.70.756
Breakable full fence-3.70.10946.3%911-4.00.098-1.20.622-2.00.388-4.70.046-5.00.101-5.90.012-2.80.239-4.50.058
Half fence+0.30.916+4.00.09850.3%813+2.80.247+2.00.416-0.70.777-1.00.750-1.90.432+1.20.640-0.50.845
Breakable half fence-2.60.276+1.20.622-2.80.24747.5%876-0.80.718-3.50.139-3.80.212-4.70.047-1.70.493-3.30.166
Low fence-1.70.464+2.00.388-2.00.416+0.80.71848.3%906-2.60.260-3.00.332-3.90.100-0.80.738-2.40.301
Single wall+0.90.688+4.70.046+0.70.777+3.50.139+2.60.26051.0%908-0.30.922-1.20.605+1.80.444+0.20.929
Fence and open+1.20.683+5.00.101+1.00.750+3.80.212+3.00.332+0.30.92251.3%388-0.90.763+2.10.487+0.50.867
Open+2.10.357+5.90.012+1.90.432+4.70.047+3.90.100+1.20.605+0.90.76352.2%908+3.00.204+1.40.546
Rectangle-0.90.706+2.80.239-1.20.640+1.70.493+0.80.738-1.80.444-2.10.487-3.00.20449.1%824-1.60.499
Octagon+0.70.756+4.50.058+0.50.845+3.30.166+2.40.301-0.20.929-0.50.867-1.40.546+1.60.49950.8%896
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 counted3,711
Win rate51.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches2.9 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Goh's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Single wall53.9%+2.90.230388
Half fence52.5%+1.50.556339
Octagon52.2%+1.20.612385
Full fence51.7%+0.70.781356
Open50.7%-0.30.897375
Fence and open50.3%-0.70.858165
Rectangle50.3%-0.70.777362
Breakable half fence49.1%-1.90.433385
Breakable full fence48.5%-2.50.293404
Low fence48.3%-2.70.289350
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 4.51 on 9 df, p 0.875

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.7%356+3.20.383-0.80.828+2.60.480+3.40.366-2.20.552+1.40.769+1.00.783+1.40.706-0.50.887
Breakable full fence-3.20.38348.5%404-4.00.278-0.60.871+0.20.950-5.40.132-1.80.699-2.20.548-1.80.626-3.70.300
Half fence+0.80.828+4.00.27852.5%339+3.40.359+4.20.268-1.40.714+2.20.642+1.80.623+2.20.555+0.30.936
Breakable half fence-2.60.480+0.60.871-3.40.35949.1%385+0.80.827-4.80.184-1.20.794-1.60.664-1.20.746-3.10.387
Low fence-3.40.366-0.20.950-4.20.268-0.80.82748.3%350-5.60.130-2.00.669-2.40.522-2.00.595-3.90.288
Single wall+2.20.552+5.40.132+1.40.714+4.80.184+5.60.13053.9%388+3.60.443+3.20.376+3.60.325+1.70.644
Fence and open-1.40.769+1.80.699-2.20.642+1.20.794+2.00.669-3.60.44350.3%165-0.40.938+0.00.995-1.90.682
Open-1.00.783+2.20.548-1.80.623+1.60.664+2.40.522-3.20.376+0.40.93850.7%375+0.40.916-1.50.671
Rectangle-1.40.706+1.80.626-2.20.555+1.20.746+2.00.595-3.60.325-0.00.995-0.40.91650.3%362-1.90.598
Octagon+0.50.887+3.70.300-0.30.936+3.10.387+3.90.288-1.70.644+1.90.682+1.50.671+1.90.59852.2%385
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 counted4,788
Win rate49.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.1 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Goh's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Open53.7%+4.70.026503
Fence and open52.8%+3.80.254214
Octagon51.3%+2.30.298462
Single wall49.6%+0.60.783486
Half fence49.1%+0.10.970436
Rectangle49.0%-0.00.986431
Full fence48.9%-0.10.951532
Low fence47.9%-1.10.591520
Breakable half fence46.4%-2.60.234472
Breakable full fence43.9%-5.10.019474
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 13.19 on 9 df, p 0.154

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.9%532+5.00.113-0.20.948+2.50.433+1.00.749-0.70.819-3.90.331-4.80.122-0.10.979-2.40.445
Breakable full fence-5.00.11343.9%474-5.20.116-2.50.437-4.00.206-5.70.076-8.90.030-9.80.002-5.10.126-7.40.023
Half fence+0.20.948+5.20.11649.1%436+2.70.418+1.20.712-0.50.878-3.70.373-4.60.160+0.10.970-2.20.507
Breakable half fence-2.50.433+2.50.437-2.70.41846.4%472-1.50.640-3.20.323-6.40.120-7.30.023-2.60.442-4.90.134
Low fence-1.00.749+4.00.206-1.20.712+1.50.64047.9%520-1.70.589-4.90.226-5.80.064-1.10.742-3.40.285
Single wall+0.70.819+5.70.076+0.50.878+3.20.323+1.70.58949.6%486-3.20.433-4.10.198+0.60.848-1.70.599
Fence and open+3.90.331+8.90.030+3.70.373+6.40.120+4.90.226+3.20.43352.8%214-0.90.830+3.80.357+1.50.716
Open+4.80.122+9.80.002+4.60.160+7.30.023+5.80.064+4.10.198+0.90.83053.7%503+4.70.150+2.40.460
Rectangle+0.10.979+5.10.126-0.10.970+2.60.442+1.10.742-0.60.848-3.80.357-4.70.15049.0%431-2.30.484
Octagon+2.40.445+7.40.023+2.20.507+4.90.134+3.40.285+1.70.599-1.50.716-2.40.460+2.30.48451.3%462
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 counted348
Win rate44.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Goh's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Low fence55.6%+11.30.14936 ·
Breakable full fence54.5%+10.30.21133 ·
Full fence51.2%+7.00.33941 ·
Open46.7%+2.40.78130 ·
Half fence44.7%+0.50.94938 ·
Breakable half fence42.1%-2.10.84619 ·
Rectangle38.7%-5.50.51531 ·
Single wall38.2%-6.00.45734 ·
Octagon34.7%-9.60.14649 ·
Fence and open33.3%-10.90.5049 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 7.29 on 9 df, p 0.607

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.2%41-3.30.776+6.50.564+9.10.511-4.30.704+13.00.261+17.90.331+4.50.705+12.50.291+16.50.114
Breakable full fence+3.30.77654.5%33+9.80.410+12.40.388-1.00.933+16.30.181+21.20.259+7.90.532+15.80.205+19.90.075
Half fence-6.50.564-9.80.41044.7%38+2.60.850-10.80.352+6.50.576+11.40.534-1.90.874+6.00.614+10.10.341
Breakable half fence-9.10.511-12.40.388-2.60.85042.1%19-13.40.343+3.90.782+8.80.657-4.60.754+3.40.812+7.40.570
Low fence+4.30.704+1.00.933+10.80.352+13.40.34355.6%36+17.30.147+22.20.233+8.90.472+16.90.169+20.90.055
Single wall-13.00.261-16.30.181-6.50.576-3.90.782-17.30.14738.2%34+4.90.787-8.40.496-0.50.969+3.50.741
Fence and open-17.90.331-21.20.259-11.40.534-8.80.657-22.20.233-4.90.78733.3%9-13.30.479-5.40.769-1.40.937
Open-4.50.705-7.90.532+1.90.874+4.60.754-8.90.472+8.40.496+13.30.47946.7%30+8.00.530+12.00.290
Rectangle-12.50.291-15.80.205-6.00.614-3.40.812-16.90.169+0.50.969+5.40.769-8.00.53038.7%31+4.00.716
Octagon-16.50.114-19.90.075-10.10.341-7.40.570-20.90.055-3.50.741+1.40.937-12.00.290-4.00.71634.7%49
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.