lawlz.
I think that pretty much sums up those who would be opposed to this change.
... Honestly, you'd think that newer players were amoeba the way they get ragged on. So -what-? They need to be able to win... or eventually they'll quit. Pokemon is a game for everyone, not just the 'elites'. I don't want the less skilled players, or the players who can't afford to buy six boxes, or the players who don't have the ability to make it to every top-tier tournament to quit.
Plain and simple, I like the current mulligan system, and I've had my fair share of lame starts [ turn one Feebas delta? Yeah, I know that feeling. ] and I've made my peace with that. Yeah, it's lame that I'm going to lose points, but that is the risk I take running a milotic line, or any other tech line.
I disagree that a paris mulligan system will help. A best two of three will certainly help... if you get a bad start twice in a row, it's honestly not the opponent's fault.
Along with that, it will make the game much more enjoyable on the part of the players who aren't as good - a five minute blowout for one match is just as depressing to players who aren't as good as a two minute donk is to anyone.
It's not wrong to take the weaker players into account when discussing heavy changes like this. I don't want Pokemon to turn in to Yuugiou where it's so terribly cutthroat that no one really has fun playing any more. I take SOTG seriously - and any game where SOTG is a priority should be a fun experience.
-
As for the 45, best two out of three... I have to agree with NoPoke. It would be exceedingly taxing on the staff, but honestly, a good States match will do the same thing. Speaking for myself only, I wouldn't have any problems staying longer to make the game more enjoyable, and in my opinion, all of the Staffers I've met so far would be in the same boat. We staff for the love of the game, and extending the game wouldn't hurt my feelings any.
Now let me go burn my soap box.