VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Goh vs Shun

Goh vs Shun in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Goh wins 50.6% of 4,689 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 counted4,689
Win rate50.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.1 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%+3.10.198404
Breakable half fence52.9%+2.30.301459
Rectangle52.1%+1.40.511484
Half fence50.6%-0.00.994474
Low fence50.5%-0.10.948489
Full fence50.1%-0.60.800481
Single wall49.9%-0.80.730469
Octagon49.1%-1.50.492454
Breakable full fence49.0%-1.70.433474
Fence and open47.8%-2.90.311295
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 4.97 on 9 df, p 0.837

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.1%481+1.10.720-0.50.870-2.80.384-0.40.899+0.20.948+2.30.533-3.60.285-2.00.542+1.00.763
Breakable full fence-1.10.72049.0%474-1.70.603-4.00.222-1.60.627-0.90.771+1.10.757-4.80.159-3.10.334-0.20.958
Half fence+0.50.870+1.70.60350.6%474-2.30.481+0.10.970+0.70.820+2.80.444-3.10.363-1.40.657+1.50.645
Breakable half fence+2.80.384+4.00.222+2.30.48152.9%459+2.40.454+3.00.353+5.10.168-0.80.821+0.90.788+3.80.248
Low fence+0.40.899+1.60.627-0.10.970-2.40.45450.5%489+0.60.848+2.70.461-3.20.341-1.60.628+1.40.669
Single wall-0.20.948+0.90.771-0.70.820-3.00.353-0.60.84849.9%469+2.10.572-3.80.260-2.20.502+0.80.814
Fence and open-2.30.533-1.10.757-2.80.444-5.10.168-2.70.461-2.10.57247.8%295-5.90.122-4.30.248-1.30.723
Open+3.60.285+4.80.159+3.10.363+0.80.821+3.20.341+3.80.260+5.90.12253.7%404+1.60.624+4.60.179
Rectangle+2.00.542+3.10.334+1.40.657-0.90.788+1.60.628+2.20.502+4.30.248-1.60.62452.1%484+3.00.367
Octagon-1.00.763+0.20.958-1.50.645-3.80.248-1.40.669-0.80.814+1.30.723-4.60.179-3.00.36749.1%454
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 counted2,356
Win rate50.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-7.5 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
Breakable half fence56.6%+6.10.052228
Open56.4%+5.90.083195
Half fence52.0%+1.60.604246
Low fence51.0%+0.60.849237
Full fence50.2%-0.30.928251
Single wall49.8%-0.70.822257
Rectangle49.0%-1.50.622241
Fence and open48.9%-1.60.706137
Octagon48.5%-2.00.524227
Breakable full fence43.0%-7.50.017228
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 12.31 on 9 df, p 0.196

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.2%251+7.20.114-1.80.683-6.40.162-0.80.850+0.40.929+1.30.807-6.20.192+1.20.784+1.70.704
Breakable full fence-7.20.11443.0%228-9.10.049-13.60.004-8.10.081-6.80.133-5.90.271-13.40.006-6.00.194-5.50.241
Half fence+1.80.683+9.10.04952.0%246-4.50.321+1.00.830+2.20.617+3.10.557-4.40.360+3.10.498+3.60.437
Breakable half fence+6.40.162+13.60.004+4.50.32156.6%228+5.50.232+6.80.136+7.70.155+0.20.972+7.60.099+8.10.083
Low fence+0.80.850+8.10.081-1.00.830-5.50.23251.0%237+1.20.781+2.10.689-5.40.267+2.10.647+2.60.576
Single wall-0.40.929+6.80.133-2.20.617-6.80.136-1.20.78149.8%257+0.90.865-6.60.164+0.80.851+1.40.767
Fence and open-1.30.807+5.90.271-3.10.557-7.70.155-2.10.689-0.90.86548.9%137-7.50.177-0.10.991+0.50.934
Open+6.20.192+13.40.006+4.40.360-0.20.972+5.40.267+6.60.164+7.50.17756.4%195+7.50.122+8.00.103
Rectangle-1.20.784+6.00.194-3.10.498-7.60.099-2.10.647-0.80.851+0.10.991-7.50.12249.0%241+0.50.913
Octagon-1.70.704+5.50.241-3.60.437-8.10.083-2.60.576-1.40.767-0.50.934-8.00.103-0.50.91348.5%227
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 counted1,981
Win rate49.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.4 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
Rectangle54.2%+4.40.175214
Breakable full fence53.0%+3.20.341198
Octagon50.8%+0.90.781197
Single wall50.6%+0.70.836178
Breakable half fence49.5%-0.30.927210
Open49.4%-0.40.912172
Full fence47.6%-2.20.524189
Half fence47.4%-2.40.481194
Fence and open47.1%-2.70.507138
Low fence47.1%-2.80.404204
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 4.43 on 9 df, p 0.881

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.6%189-5.40.287+0.20.969-1.90.704+0.60.912-2.90.573+0.50.926-1.80.733-6.60.187-3.10.537
Breakable full fence+5.40.28753.0%198+5.60.267+3.50.479+6.00.231+2.50.632+5.90.285+3.60.488-1.20.811+2.30.652
Half fence-0.20.969-5.60.26747.4%194-2.10.673+0.40.942-3.10.545+0.30.954-2.00.703-6.80.171-3.30.509
Breakable half fence+1.90.704-3.50.479+2.10.67349.5%210+2.50.616-1.00.839+2.40.658+0.10.984-4.70.335-1.20.803
Low fence-0.60.912-6.00.231-0.40.942-2.50.61647.1%204-3.50.494-0.00.994-2.40.648-7.20.144-3.70.458
Single wall+2.90.573-2.50.632+3.10.545+1.00.839+3.50.49450.6%178+3.50.542+1.10.831-3.60.472-0.20.969
Fence and open-0.50.926-5.90.285-0.30.954-2.40.658+0.00.994-3.50.54247.1%138-2.30.685-7.10.193-3.70.510
Open+1.80.733-3.60.488+2.00.703-0.10.984+2.40.648-1.10.831+2.30.68549.4%172-4.80.349-1.30.797
Rectangle+6.60.187+1.20.811+6.80.171+4.70.335+7.20.144+3.60.472+7.10.193+4.80.34954.2%214+3.50.485
Octagon+3.10.537-2.30.652+3.30.509+1.20.803+3.70.458+0.20.969+3.70.510+1.30.797-3.50.48550.8%197
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 counted352
Win rate56.5%
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 fence62.5%+6.00.37048 ·
Rectangle62.1%+5.50.53029 ·
Full fence61.0%+4.50.54241 ·
Breakable full fence60.4%+3.90.55948 ·
Open59.5%+2.90.70437 ·
Half fence58.8%+2.30.77734 ·
Breakable half fence47.6%-8.90.39521 ·
Single wall47.1%-9.50.24134 ·
Fence and open45.0%-11.50.28420 ·
Octagon43.3%-13.20.12730 ·
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 6.98 on 9 df, p 0.639

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence61.0%41+0.60.957+2.20.850+13.40.315-1.50.883+13.90.228+16.00.238+1.50.891-1.10.926+17.60.141
Breakable full fence-0.60.95760.4%48+1.60.885+12.80.324-2.10.834+13.40.231+15.40.243+1.00.929-1.60.885+17.10.141
Half fence-2.20.850-1.60.88558.8%34+11.20.418-3.70.737+11.80.331+13.80.325-0.60.957-3.20.793+15.50.216
Breakable half fence-13.40.315-12.80.324-11.20.41847.6%21-14.90.249+0.60.968+2.60.867-11.80.384-14.40.310+4.30.762
Low fence+1.50.883+2.10.834+3.70.737+14.90.24962.5%48+15.40.165+17.50.184+3.00.776+0.40.970+19.20.098
Single wall-13.90.228-13.40.231-11.80.331-0.60.968-15.40.16547.1%34+2.10.884-12.40.295-15.00.233+3.70.765
Fence and open-16.00.238-15.40.243-13.80.325-2.60.867-17.50.184-2.10.88445.0%20-14.50.296-17.10.238+1.70.907
Open-1.50.891-1.00.929+0.60.957+11.80.384-3.00.776+12.40.295+14.50.29659.5%37-2.60.830+16.10.189
Rectangle+1.10.926+1.60.885+3.20.793+14.40.310-0.40.970+15.00.233+17.10.238+2.60.83062.1%29+18.70.150
Octagon-17.60.141-17.10.141-15.50.216-4.30.762-19.20.098-3.70.765-1.70.907-16.10.189-18.70.15043.3%30
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.