VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Goh vs Jean

Goh vs Jean in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Goh wins 46.4% of 4,394 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 counted4,394
Win rate46.4%
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
Fence and open49.3%+2.90.389211
Open49.3%+2.90.187473
Full fence48.7%+2.30.302437
Breakable full fence47.5%+1.10.645400
Low fence47.3%+0.90.677450
Breakable half fence47.2%+0.80.745422
Single wall46.3%-0.10.968434
Rectangle44.8%-1.60.473453
Octagon44.0%-2.40.304418
Half fence43.9%-2.50.244474
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 6.15 on 9 df, p 0.725

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.7%437+1.20.720+4.90.142+1.60.642+1.40.675+2.40.473-0.60.896-0.50.876+3.90.240+4.70.166
Breakable full fence-1.20.72047.5%400+3.60.285+0.30.921+0.20.961+1.20.732-1.80.674-1.80.604+2.70.432+3.50.318
Half fence-4.90.142-3.60.28543.9%474-3.30.326-3.50.292-2.40.462-5.40.190-5.40.097-0.90.776-0.10.967
Breakable half fence-1.60.642-0.30.921+3.30.32647.2%422-0.20.958+0.80.805-2.10.613-2.10.530+2.40.487+3.10.361
Low fence-1.40.675-0.20.961+3.50.292+0.20.95847.3%450+1.00.761-2.00.639-1.90.558+2.50.447+3.30.327
Single wall-2.40.473-1.20.732+2.40.462-0.80.805-1.00.76146.3%434-3.00.478-3.00.375+1.50.654+2.30.501
Fence and open+0.60.896+1.80.674+5.40.190+2.10.613+2.00.639+3.00.47849.3%211+0.00.994+4.50.281+5.30.210
Open+0.50.876+1.80.604+5.40.097+2.10.530+1.90.558+3.00.375-0.00.99449.3%473+4.50.175+5.20.118
Rectangle-3.90.240-2.70.432+0.90.776-2.40.487-2.50.447-1.50.654-4.50.281-4.50.17544.8%453+0.80.814
Octagon-4.70.166-3.50.318+0.10.967-3.10.361-3.30.327-2.30.501-5.30.210-5.20.118-0.80.81444.0%418
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 counted1,574
Win rate44.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches8.0 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
Octagon52.5%+8.00.050137
Fence and open48.3%+3.70.47887
Open47.3%+2.70.401205
Low fence44.5%-0.10.982155
Breakable half fence44.4%-0.20.968153
Half fence44.4%-0.20.967162
Full fence44.3%-0.30.937149
Single wall42.2%-2.40.535147
Breakable full fence41.0%-3.60.319166
Rectangle40.2%-4.40.294127
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 6.82 on 9 df, p 0.656

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence44.3%149+3.30.550-0.10.979-0.10.979-0.20.969+2.10.713-4.00.554-3.00.573+4.10.488-8.20.163
Breakable full fence-3.30.55041.0%166-3.50.524-3.50.530-3.60.520-1.20.828-7.30.265-6.40.221+0.80.889-11.60.044
Half fence+0.10.979+3.50.52444.4%162+0.01.000-0.10.990+2.30.688-3.80.563-2.90.584+4.30.464-8.10.162
Breakable half fence+0.10.979+3.50.530-0.01.00044.4%153-0.10.990+2.30.692-3.80.567-2.90.590+4.30.470-8.10.168
Low fence+0.20.969+3.60.520+0.10.990+0.10.99044.5%155+2.30.682-3.80.573-2.80.598+4.40.461-8.00.170
Single wall-2.10.713+1.20.828-2.30.688-2.30.692-2.30.68242.2%147-6.10.364-5.10.339+2.00.735-10.40.080
Fence and open+4.00.554+7.30.265+3.80.563+3.80.567+3.80.573+6.10.36448.3%87+1.00.881+8.10.239-4.30.532
Open+3.00.573+6.40.221+2.90.584+2.90.590+2.80.598+5.10.339-1.00.88147.3%205+7.20.202-5.20.342
Rectangle-4.10.488-0.80.889-4.30.464-4.30.470-4.40.461-2.00.735-8.10.239-7.20.20240.2%127-12.40.044
Octagon+8.20.163+11.60.044+8.10.162+8.10.168+8.00.170+10.40.080+4.30.532+5.20.342+12.40.04452.5%137
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 counted2,706
Win rate47.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-8.2 pts
Survive correction1
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
Breakable full fence53.1%+5.90.063228
Full fence51.3%+4.10.153273
Fence and open50.4%+3.20.468121
Open50.4%+3.20.278260
Single wall48.9%+1.80.535282
Breakable half fence47.8%+0.60.837251
Low fence47.3%+0.10.972277
Rectangle46.4%-0.80.773323
Half fence43.5%-3.70.173299
Octagon39.0%-8.20.004267
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 15.84 on 9 df, p 0.070

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.3%273-1.80.690+7.80.062+3.50.427+4.00.349+2.30.581+0.90.874+0.90.836+4.80.239+12.30.004
Breakable full fence+1.80.69053.1%228+9.60.029+5.30.250+5.80.196+4.10.353+2.70.636+2.70.554+6.60.125+14.10.002
Half fence-7.80.062-9.60.02943.5%299-4.30.310-3.80.358-5.50.187-6.90.196-6.90.103-3.00.458+4.50.275
Breakable half fence-3.50.427-5.30.250+4.30.31047.8%251+0.50.906-1.10.795-2.60.638-2.60.560+1.40.744+8.90.042
Low fence-4.00.349-5.80.196+3.80.358-0.50.90647.3%277-1.60.697-3.10.567-3.10.474+0.80.835+8.30.050
Single wall-2.30.581-4.10.353+5.50.187+1.10.795+1.60.69748.9%282-1.50.786-1.40.736+2.50.540+10.00.019
Fence and open-0.90.874-2.70.636+6.90.196+2.60.638+3.10.567+1.50.78650.4%121+0.00.996+4.00.455+11.50.034
Open-0.90.836-2.70.554+6.90.103+2.60.560+3.10.474+1.40.736-0.00.99650.4%260+3.90.343+11.40.008
Rectangle-4.80.239-6.60.125+3.00.458-1.40.744-0.80.835-2.50.540-4.00.455-3.90.34346.4%323+7.50.067
Octagon-12.30.004-14.10.002-4.50.275-8.90.042-8.30.050-10.00.019-11.50.034-11.40.008-7.50.06739.0%267
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 counted114
Win rate52.6%
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 fence72.2%+19.60.07018 ·
Rectangle66.7%+14.00.6223 ·
Open62.5%+9.90.5628 ·
Breakable half fence61.1%+8.50.43218 ·
Octagon57.1%+4.50.71814 ·
Full fence46.7%-6.00.62015 ·
Half fence46.1%-6.50.61913 ·
Fence and open33.3%-19.30.4983 ·
Single wall20.0%-32.60.1355 ·
Breakable full fence16.7%-36.00.0706 ·
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 10.08 on 9 df, p 0.344

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.7%15+30.00.201+0.50.978-14.40.407-25.60.135+26.70.292+13.30.671-15.80.469-20.00.527-10.50.573
Breakable full fence-30.00.20116.7%6-29.50.216-44.40.059-55.50.017-3.30.887-16.70.571-45.80.086-50.00.134-40.50.095
Half fence-0.50.978+29.50.21646.1%13-15.00.409-26.10.141+26.10.308+12.80.687-16.40.466-20.50.522-11.00.568
Breakable half fence+14.40.407+44.40.059+15.00.40961.1%18-11.10.480+41.10.104+27.80.368-1.40.946-5.60.854+4.00.821
Low fence+25.60.135+55.50.017+26.10.141+11.10.48072.2%18+52.20.034+38.90.186+9.70.620+5.50.844+15.10.373
Single wall-26.70.292+3.30.887-26.10.308-41.10.104-52.20.03420.0%5-13.30.673-42.50.135-46.70.187-37.10.153
Fence and open-13.30.671+16.70.571-12.80.687-27.80.368-38.90.186+13.30.67333.3%3-29.20.387-33.30.414-23.80.453
Open+15.80.469+45.80.086+16.40.466+1.40.946-9.70.620+42.50.135+29.20.38762.5%8-4.20.898+5.40.806
Rectangle+20.00.527+50.00.134+20.50.522+5.60.854-5.50.844+46.70.187+33.30.414+4.20.89866.7%3+9.50.761
Octagon+10.50.573+40.50.095+11.00.568-4.00.821-15.10.373+37.10.153+23.80.453-5.40.806-9.50.76157.1%14
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.