Best of 3 in the context of a ladder is a totally different animal from Best of 3 in the context of a tournament, because ladders and tournaments themselves are different animals and I'm still not convinced they shouldn't remain different animals. The fact that you can already play as many matches as you want in ladder competition makes Best of 3 exactly what you suggest it is in the context of tournament competition-- "not more competitive, just different."
The function of the ladder is to rank players according to their abilities as a pokemon player. As such, the rule set used in ladder battles is what is considered standard for pokemon battling, as what is standard is what defines pokemon playing ability.
The function of the official tournament is to test players abilities as a pokemon player. As such, the rule set used in the tournament is what is considered standard for pokemon battling, for the same reasons as the ladder.
So by their very natures, the ladder and our official tournament should use the same rules. If they dont, then one of them is failing to achieve its fundamental purpose. If we changed tournaments to best of three, then it would probably be the tournament, but I mean that would really depend on the community.
Also I have battled people multiple times over with identical teams a hell of a lot. So when I say surprise sets dont work as well the second time, it isnt some shit I'm just theorising, it is about as well supported as almost anything said about pokemon ever is. And if surprise sets dont work nearly as well, then the obvious result of that will be to not use them as much. Which effectively means using what is standard more. This isnt just speculation, I mean I can see how theoretically that could be false, but I cant imagine it practically..
So now some more delving into the depths of my vast pokemon experience. I have noticed about rematches that the second match is more likely to be won by the worse player than the first. Because the game becomes one of more complete knowledge, actions are a lot easier to evaluate. Plus they have an idea of the likely outcome of one set of actions already.
So based on this experience, I really do think these changes actually will make pokemon less competitive. In the way that paper scissors rock and tic tac toe are non-competitive despite having no RNG influence whatsoever.
I think our key difference is that I think you underestimate how different a best of one game is to a best of three. And you think the opposite of me.
I also dont think our current tournaments suck ass. Though I do kinda question the ratio of tournaments with weird rulesets to more standard ones. But that is an entirely seperate issue..
If you want some advice about how you could convince people to make tournaments best of three instead of best of one, you could just ask the hosts when you sign up. Or you, aldaron and tangerine could host some yourselves.
As for non official tournaments, I really dont care at all, only it would seem very weird if we strongly recommended best of three when our official tournament was best of one..
Have a nice day.