Melee Match-Up Chart (NTSC) [Update 008 - 09.09.28]

[worldjem7]

the point is, this is simply not something that you can resolve through any sort of thought process; what's the difference between an 8-2 and a 9-1? a 55-45 and a 60-40? there is no possible way to make a logical distinction there

They can relate to percents. 80% probability of winning using character A vs character B, who would have 20%, when both players are evenly skilled at high level play.
So, if you're grossly better than your opponent, that probability would rise, and if you're the opposite then it would drop.

Of course, like any chart or tier list, it shouldn't be taken as law and more as a guide.

Right, there's not... which is why I am saying no chart > bad chart... I'm not saying "you're doing it wrong", I'm saying "you shouldn't be doing it"

but there's nothing to suggest that this effort will go any better than phanna's (which was WILDLY popular ,btw)... you still have the issue of deciding whose opinion to value, controlling variables like stage, reconciling regional differences, deciding what 'factors' are important, and most importantly, managing 300 different discussions at once

I'm prepared to do this. If I cared how long and difficult this would be, I wouldn't have made this thread, nor all the current work I've put into it up to now.

phanna's chart isn't just outdated; it wasn't even right for that time either. I think this is the main point of confusion. It's not that the chart has become obsolete; it was NEVER accurate

he "could" because it was an original idea and nobody knew how it would turn out; we all now know that it was quite the failure, and newbies to this day still point to it in asserting that kirby plays sheik very close

Wouldn't these points here be all the more reason to have a new/updated one?

 

[pockyD]

They can relate to percents. 80% probability of winning using character A vs character B, who would have 20%, when both players are evenly skilled at high level play.
So, if you're grossly better than your opponent, that probability would rise, and if you're the opposite then it would drop.

Of course, like any chart or tier list, it shouldn't be taken as law and more as a guide.

if you claimed a matchup was "80-20" and I wanted it to be "75-25", how would i go about convincing you of that without effectively showing that it should be something like "60-40"? any difference like that ends up just being splitting hairs, and should not be reflected in the outcome

apparently you understand how vague the numbers are... however, you don't really seem to understand how stupid the average smasher is and how willing they are to take things for granted

If anything, I think a 1-5 scale would be the most "relevant"... but producing "accuracy" comes at the expense of "precision", and I don't see a happy medium existing there

I'm prepared to do this. If I cared how long and difficult this would be, I wouldn't have made this thread, nor all the current work I've put into it up to now.

it's not a matter of effort; it's a matter of judging every argument presented by your personal criteria, one that is likely not uniformly shared by smashers

Wouldn't these points here be all the more reason to have a new/updated one?

no, because kirby at no point actually played sheik evenish. I don't really enjoy repeating myself, but the number put in that and other low-tier matchups was NOT "accurate" for its time; it was simply a value thrown in there on the tiniest amount of "evidence", valid or not, because legitimate evidence did not (and probably to this day, does not) exist

 

[Oracle]

I'll help out with the low tiers.
The only auto wins are shiek vs. bowser and marth vs. mewtwo, because shiek can almost indefinitely cg and combo boozer, while marth's range and gimps destroys mewtwo, while he is too floaty for mewtwo to unleash beast combos on

Roy vs. fox is 4-6 or maybe even 45-55, as cg's and combos **** fox hard, even though fox has the shine. It's nigh impossible to successfully approach vs. falco, so laser camping *****, the only way to lessen it is to pick a platform stage, in which case roy's CG's are all but ruined, so probaly 2-8 or 15-85

 

[Strong Badam]

no, because kirby at no point actually played sheik evenish.

this doesn't even have anything with the concept

 

[Binx]

I think it might be better to rank characters by average stock wins, like a sheik at a top level will almost always 4 stock pichu, will almost always 4 stock bowser, will almost always 1 stock Marth, will nearly always lose by nearly 1 stock to fox and just have it be an approximation. I know players I could beat 100 times of a 100 but my chances of winning aren't 100% just close.

I think this will in the end keep character rankings a little more similar and concrete, since yeah match up numbers really don't mean anything, especially they don't determine any sort of win percentage, players do that.

 

[Rat]

I don't think using # of stock left would work well.
The problem is that each stock has a different average value (in percentage) for each character. (Falco lives to 15% and Samus lives to 2000%) The Value of a stock also changes in each match-up. (A stock in Fox vs Falco has a different value than a stock in Purin vs Peach.)

 

[pockyD]

this doesn't even have anything with the concept

did you even make an attempt to follow the conversation

 

[Pi]

I don't like the term win %'s although I guess it's pretty inevitable to escape.

And if you're looking for a counterproductive chart, then look no further than the ones already out there.

Are you doubting that we can put together a better one? because I assure you the ones already around are not about to vanish.

I'm not too sure what you mean by counterproductive any way, what are we producing? New melee smashers? I doubt any gamer looking to play a good character is going to make a bad selection with shiek/marth/fox/falco

And everyone else is simply going to play the character they choose.

The same ol john's will always be prevelent 'your character is better than mine'

Regardless of what type of rating/ranking system we have, some char has to be lower than the other chars, and some people need to tell themselves that their char sucks, not them. Those are laws of the land bro, you can't escape them, it shouldn't be a factor when trying to do something constructive to rank the characters.

After 8 years, god ****it we need a good one.


Pocky why don't you point out all the inadequacies you see in the current charts, give reasons why, and contribute to the new one.

 

[idea]

i'm starting to think less precise numbers might be best, actually. scale of 1-10?

i...halfway agree with what pocky keeps saying. i agree that this type of chart will always be flawed, but i don't think it's so bad that a matchup chart should never be attempted.

regardless, what would help, is if everyone would just chill out a bit X_X why do smashers have to take everything so ****ing seriously...

 

[Pi]

i'm starting to think less precise numbers might be best, actually. scale of 1-10?

i...halfway agree with what pocky keeps saying. i agree that this type of chart will always be flawed, but i don't think it's so bad that a matchup chart should never be attempted.

regardless, what would help, is if everyone would just chill out a bit X_X why do smashers have to take everything so ****ing seriously...

I think it's just arrogance.


Any way, I said before, but I'd be happy with a simple 5 rating chart
Advantage
Slight Advantage
Neutral
Slight disadvantage
Disadvantage

I don't like getting to specific because then they just become john's.

 

[pockyD]

I don't like the term win %'s although I guess it's pretty inevitable to escape.

yeah it's dumb

any strong-advantaged match *should* be won by the advantaged character almost 100% of the time

And if you're looking for a counterproductive chart, then look no further than the ones already out there.

Are you doubting that we can put together a better one? because I assure you the ones already around are not about to vanish.

Yes, I am, because the shortcomings surrounding the prior chart still exist. Lack of data, too many randoms demanding response to their input while actual high-level players don't contribute, ambiguity of 'values', etc.

I'm not too sure what you mean by counterproductive any way, what are we producing? New melee smashers? I doubt any gamer looking to play a good character is going to make a bad selection with shiek/marth/fox/falco

"Producing" an accurate knowledge base

For example, if you find a glaring error in an encyclopedia, you are less likely to take the entire encyclopedia at face value, even if that's the only mistake, because it's just as likely that it's riddled with errors... and consequently, it becomes largely worthless

And everyone else is simply going to play the character they choose.

The same ol john's will always be prevelent 'your character is better than mine'

k

Regardless of what type of rating/ranking system we have, some char has to be lower than the other chars, and some people need to tell themselves that their char sucks, not them. Those are laws of the land bro, you can't escape them, it shouldn't be a factor when trying to do something constructive to rank the characters.

Sure some characters are better than others, but there's already a (super flawed, as well) mechanism for displaying that, in the tier list

As for this system, just for starters, this "system" of rankings weights the sheik vs bowser matchup as importantly as it does the sheik vs fox matchup

After 8 years, god ****it we need a good one.

no we don't

Pocky why don't you point out all the inadequacies you see in the current charts, give reasons why, and contribute to the new one.

that's what I've been doing; when the system is fault though, there's no reason to power through it anyway

and I am far from qualified to give knowledgeable opinions on more than a handful of matchups, and therein lies the problem; people overstepping their bounds is how 'charts' come to be messed up. My issue is with the system

i'm starting to think less precise numbers might be best, actually. scale of 1-10?

i...halfway agree with what pocky keeps saying. i agree that this type of chart will always be flawed, but i don't think it's so bad that a matchup chart should never be attempted.

Certainly the notion that no chart is better than a flawed chart is debatable, but I don't think anyone has tried to convince me otherwise yet

regardless, what would help, is if everyone would just chill out a bit X_X why do smashers have to take everything so ****ing seriously...

nobody's getting agitated about anything... and if you don't intend to take such a project 'seriously', then it's pretty clearly not worth doing at all

it's not like any of us are going to have nightmares about a matchup chart tonight; while posting on what i consider to be a relatively serious subject for this forum, i post seriously, and i'm not surprised that others do the same

 

[otg]

Upon reviewing the numbers in this matchup chart, I give them *******, two big thumbs down.

 

[worldjem7]

You won't be happy with any system, though. You think there's no right way of doing this. Until you come up with something better, or at least suggest a change that would make this one better, I can't really take your posts seriously when you criticize the system here. All you're really doing is clogging up production of the chart.

Also, the chart shown on the first post is not the end-all-be-all match-up chart. You keep implying that this is the only chart I'm going to do and this is the only information I'll ever try to find and provide when I plainly wrote on the first post the exact opposite. The chart wasn't accurate enough, and I knew it would never be unless I asked players not from my region, so the best way I thought to get it as accurate as possible as soon as possible was to post it on the boards to see if knowledgeable players could help contribute to it. If they can't find it I'll seek them out and show them this.

You can doubt all you want, I'm still going to do this. Privately or publicly.

 

[Pi]

Again I don't think this project should be left to the masses, because the masses are simply not qualified. Not to say some people aren't qualified, but the majority of information you get probably isn't going to be helpful in the slightest.

This is really a project I'd like to see undertook by the SBR, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think this would have gathered a quite different reception if it were presented by someone with a purple or red name, which is quite sad really.

The biggest problem I forsee with this chart being made with the help of all of the community is trying to separate the usable information from the ignorant bias information

For example, if you find a glaring error in an encyclopedia, you are less likely to take the entire encyclopedia at face value, even if that's the only mistake, because it's just as likely that it's riddled with errors... and consequently, it becomes largely worthless

Which is a problem we have even with the current ones.
I would sooner put together a chart for those who could recognize it for what it is, an educated informative guess, than the masses who would take it at face value

which in my opinion makes the endeavor worthwhile




And I'm going to have to agree with worldjem when he says you won't be happy with any chart.

I'm still not sure what you are trying to accomplish actually, are you trying to prevent us from undertaking this project? If so why, with the right effort what we could produce from a educated community effort is going to be more accurate than the ranking systems we have currently, and yes the flaws still exist but we now recognize them as flaws, and I doubt we will come up with something that will do damage to the community.
If you truly believe the community is as easily influenced as you say it is then what we should do is create a ranking system with the low tiers at the top to start getting more people playing them.
But I think you know as well as I do that a chart like that wouldn't work in that way.

 

[Strong Badam]

Opinions of high/top tier mains vs. low tier characters will be ignorant because they never play against low tiers.
Opinions of (knowledgeable and well-known) low tier mains vs. high/top tier characters will be useful in this project.

 

[unknown522]

so, instead of arguing, how about people give their inputs about how the matchups are. Some of these matchups listed were estimates by us who don't main these characters.

The chart is posted for you all to give us your input, so we can update it

 

[Strong Badam]

i already did, on page 1.
everyone just ignored it.

 

[worldjem7]

Keep it intelligent, though, or else you're just spamming claims.If you have something to contribute you better make sure you have something to back up what you say.

And to the critics: Donate or don't care.

I'm not forcing you to do anything. You're coming in here of your own accord.

@Strong Bad: it wasn't ignored. It was noted. All posts that have relevant info are noted.

 

[unknown522]

i already did, on page 1.
everyone just ignored it.

alright. I saw it

 

[unknown522]

sorry about double post. It slipped my mind

Do you ever watch professional Ganons (Renth, Kage, Linguini, 1233, Chadd, Magus) going up against professional Falcos? If not, then you might not be too familiar with the match-ups. Maybe it should be just 40-60 just to be safe, but 30-70 is just way too inaccurate in my opinion. Ask any other Ganon pros, as mentioned above, and they'll give you similar match-up ratios as mine.

I saw kage play shiz, and lamchops in person. I've seen him play Bam lots of times. I've seen him play against PKM's falco, marth, ganon dittos, low tiers.

I've personally played kage lots of times in tournament (3 weeks ago), pools and brackets and I've seen him play raynex in many many MMs. And Vwins who is probably the best peach right now (groundless statement). I've played them a lot, and have watched them play

 

[Vsin]

A few things I'd like to say...

- There is no such thing as a 100 - 0 matchup. Anybody CAN beat anybody at an equal skill level, that is a fact (eg: chance, in the zone, mistakes). 90 - 10 on the other hand, CAN exist.

- For the low tiers, take a look at the matchup threads in each character's forum. Generally those give numbers.

Actually, you should've gone through each character forum, recorded those matchup numbers, averaged them out, then come out with the list. It would be of OK accuracy. And I'm pretty sure all the forums have some sort of matchup thread (be it half-finished, complete, rambling, etc).

 

[unknown522]

A few things I'd like to say...

- There is no such thing as a 100 - 0 matchup. Anybody CAN beat anybody at an equal skill level, that is a fact (eg: chance, in the zone, mistakes). 90 - 10 on the other hand, CAN exist.

- For the low tiers, take a look at the matchup threads in each character's forum. Generally those give numbers.

Actually, you should've gone through each character forum, recorded those matchup numbers, averaged them out, then come out with the list. It would be of OK accuracy. And I'm pretty sure all the forums have some sort of matchup thread (be it half-finished, complete, rambling, etc).

noted. It's not too late for us to update, and to do all of that.

There will be an update in a few days probably

 

[Blue Yoshi]

I know this has already been said countless times (too lazy to read all the past posts):

You should check the individual character specifics boards, find their matchups, and use that. You should do that for the low / bottom tiers especially. It looks as if you guys thought "well this character sucks so they should stand no chance against these characters". Here's what I've heard on some specific low tiers. Don't quote me here as I'm not 100% sure, but check it out anyways.

Pichu does fairly well against Fox due to chaingrabs, and general comboability (up-air, up-throw chaingrab, etc.). It's still in fox's favour, but definitely not an impossible matchup.

G&W counters (or does very well against) the space animals / fastfallers. He can chaingrab them (up-throw, or down-throw at higher percents), and just in general combo them pretty easily. I believe the G&W boards say he counters the space animals.

I've heard Yoshi does well against Marth, and Kirby is about even with Sheik. I don't know if either is true or not, but I've heard both from many different people.

Bottom line, check the low tier matchup charts, as they give more accurate results. Some results may surprize you (like GaW vs Spacies).

 

[Mogwai]

^this is why false information is worse than no information^

 

[victra♥]

edit: Shows how much I know. I need some rest. -o-

 

[Oracle]

I don't think so, blue yoshi. You're only looking at one side of the spectrum: the offensive side. Sure, game and watch has cgs and easy combos on fox and falco. But what happens when Fox/Falco goes on the offensive? G&W is extremely light, dies very early, has a tiny shield that's easy to poke, with fox has an incredibly easy recovery to shine and then ledgehog, and with falco has no good way to get around lasers.

Pichu has no range or priority and dies really really fast. CG's don't last forever

Yoshi sucks against marth. He's relatively easy to combo with yoshi, sure, but doesn't have enough range to start those combos vs. marth.

 

[JPOBS]

I don't think so, blue yoshi. You're only looking at one side of the spectrum: the offensive side. Sure, game and watch has cgs and easy combos on fox and falco. But what happens when Fox/Falco goes on the offensive? G&W is extremely light, dies very early, has a tiny shield that's easy to poke, with fox has an incredibly easy recovery to shine and then ledgehog, and with falco has no good way to get around lasers.

fox and falco are obviously much better characters than g&w and beat him but

fox doesnt have an "incredibly easy recovery to shine spike" i dont know how much you're played or play g&w but his b-up is decptively big hitbox. I wouldnt say its any harder to shinespike g&W than it is to shinespike any other char.

he does have a decent way to get around lasers: he can crouch wavedash. falco can still hit him with the really low lasers but thats harder than it sounds not even pros shoot low lasers everytime.

anyway, the reason why he was looking at it from a purely offensive point of view was because we already know how spacies beat g&w but you may not know vice versa. like he said, chain grabs and great combos, once sapcies get of the stage, they die. if they recovery low/horizonal they get dtilted, if they try to firefox/b-over onto the stage they eat a nair.

approaching isnt too hard with wavedashed jabs and fair has good priority/disjointed.

 

[Europhoria]

I think all the 10-0s should read 90-10 to shut up the low tier support. >_> Sure they CAN win... but in a tournament if like... Sheik, Fox, Falco, Marth choose to play super campy and gay against Yoshi or whatever. Lol GG

 

[idea]

so uh...

if you guys think this is bad...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuaX8CFlrL4&feature=PlayList&p=A4F0F3D395302C43&index=0&playnext=1

OH PLEASE GOD NO

 

[Rat]

so uh...

if you guys think this is bad...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuaX8CFlrL4&feature=PlayList&p=A4F0F3D395302C43&index=0&playnext=1

OH PLEASE GOD NO

why did I watch the whole thing! I feel like i got ***** by sunshine.

 

[Dogysamich]

Now, I like this idea and like the support that goes behind it; but I realistically dont think this will happen. The thing is, I honestly dont see it working out.

Problem is, outside of the Elite 4 and friends (read: "the tourney viable characters"), if people dont have a good _____ in their state, then that character is considered abysmally bad and that character has no chance at winning what so ever.

Like, take the Doc line for example (well, kinda cause I play doc, so I actually have a clue about that.)

The way this matchup chart is now, every character above doc has an advantage (and none of them are slight lol), and every character below doc is at disadvantage. Both sides of that are so wrong it's hilarious.

The problem doesnt really come from "proving who has an advantage over who" as it really is making people believe what they've never seen. I mean really, who has seen Doc vs Jiggs "at high level?" I want you to tell Mango Doc vs Jiggs is 35/65 for jiggs and see if you dont get pimpslapped. But who's going to believe him? Who's going to believe me? How many good Doc players are there out there to prove something like this? A handful; and even with that, how many of them know the matchup and play it right?

Same thing starts to go into the lowtiers. This chart automatically has kirby with impossible matchups down to samus (dont get me started on impossible matchups). It's been around for ages that one of kirby's better matchups is Capfal. How in hell would anybody go about aruging that? The only person who's even played kirby in tourney recently has been vanz.

___

My Tl;DR version of this is basically what's the point of making a matchup when a large majority of the cast is under and/or mis-represented from region to region.

I say this understanding how character selection vs matchup charts work in other games compared to melee. But be real about something, do you really think that there's atleast ONE good enough person for each character that's willing to spend the time to share info about each matchup? How bout we stop at just them playing the matchup enough to know it at all?

Because I know for a fact I've never seen a good Ness in tourney ever. I highly doubt Doc has something along the lines of an 8-2 vs him, but I'm fairly confident that if I happen to see a Ness in the rest of the time I play melee, it'll probably just be some random person who either doesnt know how to DjC or doesnt know when to stop DjCing.

 

[idea]

dogy - how do you feel about limiting it to matchups people are knowledgeable about, then?

 

[Tee ay eye]

Nice chart

I don't think the Mewtwo section's really accurate though, but it's a work in progress

 

[Rat]

If, as a community, we do not know the Doc vs Ness match-up then we should just leave it blank.

Start with the common knowledge and work towards the fringe. (or are you saying that we are starting at the fringe and moving into the unknowable?)


edit:
Are we working on the match-ups for a high level of play or the Highest level of play?

 

[Grunt]

I like how Dogy's TLDR section is just as long as the regular section.

 

[Dogysamich]

dogy - how do you feel about limiting it to matchups people are knowledgeable about, then?

Well im under the assumption that having knowledgeable people talk about it is the understood rule.

My arguement is that there's not enough people, if any, to cover alot of matchups. I mean, I could talk for days about Doc matchups, I've played just about every one of them. But it would make no sense for my say to be "the say". We cant even really agree on stuff amongst ourself.

Take West Coast commentary for example. I dunno how many times HMW has gone on record saying he (and his people) think Sheik is Doc's hardest matchup, and have even called me out quoting me as saying Capfal is hardest (which I believe, I could explain all that but that's not the point of this post). You take 18spikes for example and he says Luigi is harder for Doc than spanimals or Marth. With all this being said we're still 3 people.

To go along with it, you have to flip it around; what do Sheik players think about the Doc matchup? To them it's a no-brainer if every Doc they've played is some mindless scrub who thinks they can actually try a f.air and get away with it. The thing is, in that sense they're right. I cant really argue if somebody says "Peach destroys Doc" when every Doc they've ever seen is Smashmaster471. There just isnt a big number of Docs.

__

Now think of this, who plays Zelda in tourney now? I actually do know a few, but who's goin to believe anything they say if it's anything along the lines of "Hey we have a chance!" People around here are actually starting to play Zelda to counter Jiggs, it used to be old folklore than Zelda was one of Jiggs worst matchups. Who believes it now?

Realistically nobody, since barely anybody plays Zelda, and the idea of having one that
1) Can actually compete "at high level"
2) Has played all the matchups
3) Actually KNOWS all the matchups
is pretty farfetched.

__

Pichu.
*...*
Yeah.

_______

Point being, Im not specifically questioning the quality of feedback that's going to be given here, but how much, if any, can be rightfully used for alot of characters.

I like how Dogy's TLDR section is just as long as the regular section.

I tried, but well, I kinda like to see myself type sometimes. Sorry. V_V

 

[Cia]

there's so much i don't agree with on this list.

Peach has a disadvantage against Pikachu?!

LOL

and LOLOLOL at kirby's chart

 

[Binx]

I think it's just arrogance.


Any way, I said before, but I'd be happy with a simple 5 rating chart
Advantage
Slight Advantage
Neutral
Slight disadvantage
Disadvantage

I don't like getting to specific because then they just become john's.

I like that too, in fact I suggested that very same thing several years ago in Phanna's chart and again when brawl first came out.

So yeah I think 6 ratings would be fine,

Advantage
Slight Advantage
Neutral / Near even
Slight Disadvantage
Disadvantage
this f***ing match up doesn't even exist

With this system you can still rank with numbers 1-5 and it has a way to debase assumptions, and furthermore for the matchups that we don't know not enough people really play those for us to really care if they are accurate anyways, I mean I care, but do I really care if someone thinks Ness is a Pichu counter?

Maybe have several charts for different skill levels, wouldn't be that hard either.

Top level of play matchups vs Midlevel of play match ups vs next to no tech skill matchups, this would stop noobs from arguing about the top level ones at least.

 

[Hazygoose]

spacies don't have 100/0 on ness.
i'll beast better spacies than me all day.


i always thought top tier should be this box:
sheik----->marth
^................|
|.................|
|.................v
fox<-------falco

(smashboards doesn't want this box to work without the periods, sorry)

each have 1 positive, 1 negative, and 1 neutral matchup against each other, and because of that these 4 are clearly top tier.
however, falco has an extra bad matchup (peach) and sheik does too (ICs...arguable but mainly because it's so impossible to find "evenly skilled" IC and sheik players to do a set)
then since sheik has the advantage over falco, that's always been my justification for
1) fox/marth
3) sheik
4) falco

just my $0.02
some people think falcon beats marth, peach beats sheik, and falco has many more weaknesses, so it's not like i expect my ideas to be universal.

 

[Cia]

^ falco doesn't beat fox. that only happens if the falco plays the match up better than the fox player.

Sheik:Fox - match up number varies with stage. usually slightly in fox's favor.
Sheik:Falco - 45:55
Sheik:Marth - 60:40
Sheik:Falcon - 50:50 (IMO, most people think 60:40)
Sheik:Jigglypuff - 50:50 (i think this is one of the most even match ups in the game)
Sheikeach - 60:40
Sheik:Ganondorf - 55:45 (this match up is closer than people think)
Sheik:Ice Climbers - 60:40

Fox:Falco - 60:40
Fox:Marth - 60:40
Fox:Falcon - 60:40
Fox:Jigglypuff - 60:40
Foxeach - 70:30
Fox:Ganondorf - 65:35
Fox:Ice Climbers - 60:40

Falco:Marth - varies with stage. either can be slightly advantageous w/ stage.
Falco:Falcon - 60:40
Falco:Jigglypuff - 60:40
Falcoeach - 60:40
Falco:Ganondorf - 55:45
Falco:Ice Climbers - 55:45

Marth:Falcon - i'm honestly not sure. maybe 45:55
Marth:Jigglypuff - 55:45
Martheach - 60:40 (possibly 55:45)
Marth:Ganondorf - 60:40
Marth:Ice Climbers - 70:30

Falcon:Jigglypuff - 60:40
Falconeach - 60:40
Falcon:Ganondorf - 60:40
Falcon:Ice Climbers 65:35

Jigglypuffeach - 45:55
Jigglypuff:Ganondorf - 35:65
Jigglypuff:Ice Climbers 55:45

Peach:Ganondorf - 55:45
Peach:Ice Climbers - 60:40

Ganondorf:Ice Climbers - 60:40

other characters don't really matter. Doc is ok tho.