This needs addressed, whether for everyones benefit or for my own sanity.
A lot of people are suggesting ranked matches should be sets and not just one game. I'll get into the arguments put forward by those for sets, explain why I believe "one and done" is the best way to tackle it (I know probably most of you won't agree, but please hear me out), and finally I'll get into what I believe is the real problem here.
Right so, ranked is a league system not a knockout tournament. I can't think of a single league system of any sport that contains sets; I'm sure there are probably a few but it's not the norm. Having sets is a knockout tournament setup up, this is a league. Not everyone playing wants to get into a set, casual gamers in particular. This game is made for all, not just pro/good players and if that casual player gets destroyed in the 1st game how many rage quits do you think there are going to be? What does the other player gain from a 2nd chance of destroying them? If you want to play sets you have that option via player matches.
The argument I've seen for sets is, it's a ranked system, the better player should win over a set. There may be valid reasons for a set system but this is the only one I've seen. So to address it I'll reference my point that league systems don't have sets and give you an example. I don't know if any of you follow the English Premier League, but Chelsea won the league. They are the best team in England this season, no question, but they did get beat in a league game by Crystal Palace, a team that finished 14th. Did Chelsea get a best of 3 to prove they're the better team? No. That was proven by their league position. My point being you might lose to a player you're better than but if you are indeed the better player, you rank higher in the league table overall.
I used to believe this was a pride issue; someone got beat by someone they thought they were better than, that they should of won and wanted to prove to themselves or the opponent that they are. Well tough luck, you got beat, hold that. But after reading a lot of comments on the matter the attitude seems to be "how dare that scrub beat me", like some delusional self entitlement. You have to win, it isn't handed to you because you're the "better" player. And even more of an issue is the comments that the opponent did something random or didn't play the game how they're supposed to. That is some next level arrogance! I've got news for you, they can play it anyway they want. If they jump about like a headless chicken and beat you, that's on you. So get your head out of your hole and accept the defeat.
I'll leave you with this, outside of any technical difficulties, if you got beat, it happened because of one of 2 reasons: you got outplayed, or you fucked up.