Do you have any unpopular opinions about the anime?

[Daren]

My big unpopuar opinion; I disliked DP and thought Paul was a good idea with terrible execution; he felt to me less like he was a stronger trainer and more that he had a "type advantage" against Ash, combined with being lucky that Ash wasn't using his best Pokémon and DP Pikachu wasn't at his best.

Edit: Wait, did I already post this? I have an odd feeling...

(Snip for length)

I agree with your point. My fear is that for Sun and Moon we could get another BW style "Ash is worse than in the previous series" and go back to losing to some newbie at the start and relying on other people to handle the villainous teams.

 

[Hidden Mew]

Ash saving the Kalos region would be a victory itself so at least he wouldn't leave the Kalos empty handed. My unpopular opinion is that Pikachu should not be losing anymore battles since it has 6 regions of experience now.

Technically, he wouldn't be leaving Kalos empty handed regardless. Getting to the finals in of itself is a major accomplishment for Ash, or really anyone for that matter. I remember after the Unova League and at the end of BW as well, people were genuinely questioning what Ash gained by going to Unova in the first place. Part of this had to do with how he was steadily improving up to that series, but it was something people wondered about for awhile since the journey didn't really go anywhere for Ash, even for a Pokemon journey. In retrospect, I think a lot of my problems with BW could be summed up by how the story and characters didn't really go anywhere. People aren't going to ask the same question for XY most likely because Ash has progressed throughout the series. He has gotten stronger as a trainer, even some actual character development during the Snowbelle Gym mini-arc and he still got the highest rank in a League thus far. Just because he didn't get a trophy doesn't mean he'll leave empty handed.

As for Pikachu, I don't know if that's an unpopular opinion per say, or at least regarding Pikachu's experience. Most people tend to be upset with how Pikachu loses because of its experience. I'm not sure why having six regions of experience suddenly means that it shouldn't lose though. It's not like Pikachu wasn't experienced in BW or DP, so I'm not sure how six is the magic number here. But I don't think that experience means that a Pokemon shouldn't lose. Experience doesn't and shouldn't mean unbeatable. That's kind of backwards logic. It just means that a Pokemon can be difficult to defeat. Despite all of Pikachu's experience, it really doesn't have the best stamina or endurance. It is a strong Pokemon, but that doesn't mean it can't lose.

Besides all that, it would be boring for a Pokemon to never lose from a story perspective. If Pikachu never lost, it remove a lot of tension and suspense from battles since the audience would know that it wouldn't lose. Trainer want to make their Pokemon strong and they don't like to lose, but that shouldn't mean that losing is something that should never happen. That wouldn't work for the story or the characters, especially when losing can help them to grow. The trip to Snowbelle wouldn't have been nearly as interesting or as memorable if Ash didn't lose his first match against Wulfric and dealt with the aftermath before challenging him again.

 

[LuxrayOfTheWild]

Besides all that, it would be boring for a Pokemon to never lose from a story perspective.

I'm looking at you, Mega Charizard X, who hasn't lost since their debut. Characters who never lose in general get boring honestly, disregarding high ranking trainers such as the Elite 4 and Champion. If they keep on winning and winning

 

[Arceus the Dragon]

Mega Charizard X also lost to the primals I believe. That makes two loses regardless if it a wild pokemon loss or Elite Four loss. A loss is a loss.

 

[Hidden Mew]

Mega Charizard X also lost to the primals I believe. That makes two loses regardless if it a wild pokemon loss or Elite Four loss. A loss is a loss.

That doesn't really make Mega Charizard X's strings of victories much better though. Even if you count the battle against the Primal forms as a loss, its victories and accomplishments well outshines its defeats, which is why it's still a good example of how a Pokemon winning all the time is boring. Two defeats doesn't suddenly make it less broken and overpowered.

 

[Arceus the Dragon]

That doesn't really make Mega Charizard X's strings of victories much better though. Even if you count the battle against the Primal forms as a loss, its victories and accomplishments well outshines its defeats, which is why it's still a good example of how a Pokemon winning all the time is boring. Two defeats doesn't suddenly make it less broken and overpowered.

So basically being the strongest makes someone overpowered and broken but if being someone like Ash who loses repeatedly is okay? My logical tells me that being overpowered is a good thing because it raises the chances of you remaining undefeated. Yes, you can learn something from losing but that doesn't have to apply to everyone. When I played the games, I win as much as possible and does that make me overpowered? Perhaps but I rather win constantly than to lose again and again.

 

[Shadao]

So basically being the strongest makes someone overpowered and broken but if being someone like Ash who loses repeatedly is okay? My logical tells me that being overpowered is a good thing because it raises the chances of you remaining undefeated. Yes, you can learn something from losing but that doesn't have to apply to everyone. When I played the games, I win as much as possible and does that make me overpowered? Perhaps but I rather win constantly than to lose again and again.

Undefeated does not make one a better trainer. Nor is it a good story method considering it renders the conflict to be tensionless and boring if you win too much. Video games are a poor example to use because you control the character and decide the path. It's for your own enjoyment and not for everyone else. Even that, there are times in the Pokémon games where I deliberately reset to fight a Gym Leader again because I found the battle to be too quick and easy for my taste thanks to the Pokémon I choose.

I like victories but I like to feel I actually earn them instead of crushing everyone with no challenge.

 

[Arceus the Dragon]

Undefeated does not make one a better trainer. Nor is it a good story method considering it renders the conflict to be tensionless and boring if you win too much. Video games are a poor example to use because you control the character and decide the path. It's for your own enjoyment and not for everyone else. Even that, there are times in the Pokémon games where I deliberately reset to fight a Gym Leader again because I found the battle to be too quick and easy for my taste thanks to the Pokémon I choose.

I like victories but I like to feel I actually earn them instead of crushing everyone with no challenge.

I think being undefeated does make one a better trainer. I rather be on the winning side than the losing side.

 

[Shadao]

I think being undefeated does make one a better trainer. I rather be on the winning side than the losing side.

Better learn defeat fast than never experience defeat at all. Cause one day, you may experience the worst kind of defeat yet. Ask Ash of the Indigo League.

 

[Hidden Mew]

So basically being the strongest makes someone overpowered and broken but if being someone like Ash who loses repeatedly is okay? My logical tells me that being overpowered is a good thing because it raises the chances of you remaining undefeated. Yes, you can learn something from losing but that doesn't have to apply to everyone. When I played the games, I win as much as possible and does that make me overpowered? Perhaps but I rather win constantly than to lose again and again.

First of all, you can't really compare video game experiences to characters in the show. Not only are the two formats completely different, but you're the one in control of the video game. You have full control of your character and what you do, while the same cannot be said for the anime. So you can't take the overpowered and broken status that Alain has and apply it to yourself just because you keep winning in the games. It really doesn't make any sense. Plus, as I said before, everyone has different experiences while playing the video games, so you can't really say that everyone playing the games is overpowered either. I call Alain broken and overpowered not just because he wins almost all the time, but because of how huge his accomplishments are. Defeating an Elite 4 member, going head to head with a Legendary Pokemon and crushing through eight Gyms is the kind of stuff that makes Alain an overpowered trainer with a broken Mega Charizard X.

I get the impression that you think losing is something that absolutely needs to be avoided at all cost and if that's the case, that's really not a good outlook on defeat. Sure, people don't want to lose normally and they try their best to win, but I don't think that makes the idea of losing something horrible that needs to be avoided. From a story perspective, it would be seriously boring if Ash didn't lose at least sometime. If your main character just wins all the time, that takes away any tension and suspense the story has. Why bother being invested if there's a zero percent chance of Ash losing anytime?

I'm not sure why learning something from losing doesn't have to apply to everyone either. Sometimes you make mistakes in the mist of battle or you just come across a stronger trainer and reflecting on the battle can help you to improve. You can learn from your victories too of course, but losing itself is not a horrible fate. The show has always emphasized that trainers can learn from defeat. No one is above defeat, regardless of how often they win, so that concept is just strange to me. I'd rather have a protagonist like Ash who does lose and does try to improve after his defeats rather than someone like Alain who can breeze through the Gyms and Kalos League with relative ease.

 

[Arceus the Dragon]

First of all, you can't really compare video game experiences to characters in the show. Not only are the two formats completely different, but you're the one in control of the video game. You have full control of your character and what you do, while the same cannot be said for the anime. So you can't take the overpowered and broken status that Alain has and apply it to yourself just because you keep winning in the games. It really doesn't make any sense. Plus, as I said before, everyone has different experiences while playing the video games, so you can't really say that everyone playing the games is overpowered either. I call Alain broken and overpowered not just because he wins almost all the time, but because of how huge his accomplishments are. Defeating an Elite 4 member, going head to head with a Legendary Pokemon and crushing through eight Gyms is the kind of stuff that makes Alain an overpowered trainer with a broken Mega Charizard X.

I get the impression that you think losing is something that absolutely needs to be avoided at all cost and if that's the case, that's really not a good outlook on defeat. Sure, people don't want to lose normally and they try their best to win, but I don't think that makes the idea of losing something horrible that needs to be avoided. From a story perspective, it would be seriously boring if Ash didn't lose at least sometime. If your main character just wins all the time, that takes away any tension and suspense the story has. Why bother being invested if there's a zero percent chance of Ash losing anytime?

I'm not sure why learning something from losing doesn't have to apply to everyone either. Sometimes you make mistakes in the mist of battle or you just come across a stronger trainer and reflecting on the battle can help you to improve. You can learn from your victories too of course, but losing itself is not a horrible fate. The show has always emphasized that trainers can learn from defeat. No one is above defeat, regardless of how often they win, so that concept is just strange to me. I'd rather have a protagonist like Ash who does lose and does try to improve after his defeats rather than someone like Alain who can breeze through the Gyms and Kalos League with relative ease.

Tobias defeated eight gyms brutally and crush half Ash's team with one legendary and the other half with another. Yes, they are both legendary but that still made Tobias overpowered. If Ash is going to lose a battle then it has to be up against someone like Tobias, Alain or the champion of a region. Losing to a trainer with a Snivy or some beginning pokemon is just ridiculous. Alain was meant to be overpowered otherwise the writers would have made him lose more than he had won. That was the whole point to his character.

 

[Hidden Mew]

Tobias defeated eight gyms brutally and crush half Ash's team with one legendary and the other half with another. Yes, they are both legendary but that still made Tobias overpowered. If Ash is going to lose a battle then it has to be up against someone like Tobias, Alain or the champion of a region. Losing to a trainer with a Snivy or some beginning pokemon is just ridiculous. Alain was meant to be overpowered otherwise the writers would have made him lose more than he had won. That was the whole point to his character.

So now you've gone from defending from Alain being called overpowered to fully admitting that he was overpowered because that was the point of his character? I'm both confused and surprised.

You're basically saying that Ash can only lose to overpowered and broken trainers now, correct? If that's the case, that's not really a good idea. Sure, I didn't like that he lost to a Snivy at the start of BW either. I'm pretty sure everyone hated that and it's become one of the more infamous moments in the anime, or at least it feels like it has given that it's a frequently used example to get on Ash's case, but that doesn't mean that going the opposite route of only losing to broken trainers is a good idea. They obviously have to have Ash battle against strong trainers to give him a challenge, but they don't have to be overpowered and broken to give him a challenge. Wulfric is a good example since in their first match, he was a challenge not only because of his Snow Warning/Ice Body strategy, but also because of how distracted Ash was emotionally during the match. Wulfric was strong, but not to the point where he seemed practically unbeatable.

Alain is an example of making a trainer way too strong. He was already strong from the start, but they just gave him accomplishments that just made the whole hype up Alain's strength go overboard. It's not just winning all the time, but winning with frequent ease with the same Pokemon that makes it look unbeatable. Or if you want another example that isn't Alain for once here, Iris's Dragonite during that Junior World Cup tournament was overpowered because it defeated two Ice Pokemon with ridiculous ease. Doing something like that not only made it seem too strong, but it also made its eventual defeat too unbelievable when it seemed practically unstoppable before. There is a difference between a strong trainer who gives Ash a challenge and an overpowered trainer.

Besides all that, it would still be boring if Ash only lost to broken overpowered trainers. If he goes up against the Champion or a trainer with a team of Legendary, of course the audience knows that he's going to lose. If he won all of his other battles, that still removes a lot of tension and conflict. From a story perspective, your characters can't win all the time, especially your main character. Losing helps keep the story more interesting and less stagnant, it gives room for possible character development and just shaking up the status quo in general. Ash winning all the time except when he faces off against overpowered trainer would still be boring.

 

[Arceus the Dragon]

So now you've gone from defending from Alain being called overpowered to fully admitting that he was overpowered because that was the point of his character? I'm both confused and surprised.

You're basically saying that Ash can only lose to overpowered and broken trainers now, correct? If that's the case, that's not really a good idea. Sure, I didn't like that he lost to a Snivy at the start of BW either. I'm pretty sure everyone hated that and it's become one of the more infamous moments in the anime, or at least it feels like it has given that it's a frequently used example to get on Ash's case, but that doesn't mean that going the opposite route of only losing to broken trainers is a good idea. They obviously have to have Ash battle against strong trainers to give him a challenge, but they don't have to be overpowered and broken to give him a challenge. Wulfric is a good example since in their first match, he was a challenge not only because of his Snow Warning/Ice Body strategy, but also because of how distracted Ash was emotionally during the match. Wulfric was strong, but not to the point where he seemed practically unbeatable.

Alain is an example of making a trainer way too strong. He was already strong from the start, but they just gave him accomplishments that just made the whole hype up Alain's strength go overboard. It's not just winning all the time, but winning with frequent ease with the same Pokemon that makes it look unbeatable. Or if you want another example that isn't Alain for once here, Iris's Dragonite during that Junior World Cup tournament was overpowered because it defeated two Ice Pokemon with ridiculous ease. Doing something like that not only made it seem too strong, but it also made its eventual defeat too unbelievable when it seemed practically unstoppable before. There is a difference between a strong trainer who gives Ash a challenge and an overpowered trainer.

Besides all that, it would still be boring if Ash only lost to broken overpowered trainers. If he goes up against the Champion or a trainer with a team of Legendary, of course the audience knows that he's going to lose. If he won all of his other battles, that still removes a lot of tension and conflict. From a story perspective, your characters can't win all the time, especially your main character. Losing helps keep the story more interesting and less stagnant, it gives room for possible character development and just shaking up the status quo in general. Ash winning all the time except when he faces off against overpowered trainer would still be boring.

Alain might be overpowered but he wouldn't win against the region champion of any region which mean the champions are even more overpowered. I reckon being overpowered is better than being overweak in my opinion. Ash might not be overweak but he is on his way with his constant losing.

 

[Hidden Mew]

Alain might be overpowered but he wouldn't win against the region champion of any region which mean the champions are even more overpowered. I reckon being overpowered is better than being overweak in my opinion. Ash might not be overweak but he is on his way with his constant losing.

So you are still on trying to use other characters to make it seem like Alain isn't as overpowered, or at least soften the blow that he is indeed overpowered. That's a pretty weak argument. Sure, Alain wouldn't defeat a region's Elite 4 Champion, although a part of me wouldn't be surprised if he could given he was able to defeat Malva and with his Mega Charizard X being as broken as it is, but that doesn't really make it any better that he's an overpowered trainer. At least Champions being overpowered is more justified than Alain's strength is in my opinion. The Elite 4 and Champions have always been depicted as trainers with skills high above normal trainers like Ash. It wouldn't really be fitting if they were struggling against someone like Ash, especially when most of the Champions are adults who would have years of experience over a ton of young trainers.

Alain really doesn't have that justification for his strength or even what Tobias had for that matter. He just is that strong because the writers went really overboard with hyping up his strength for his battles with Ash and because they really like Mega Charizard X. That isn't a good explanation for his strength and it can be annoying, as well as distracting, to the audience.

And how the heck is Ash close to overweak? I'm pretty sure that isn't a term like overpowered is either. And how is Ash constantly losing? For someone who claims that Ash is his favorite character and was emphasizing the importance of Ash getting to the Kalos League finals, this still screams anti-Ash bias with a hint of Alain favoritism. Ash does lose, but I don't think it's constantly throughout each series and certainly not within XY. Overpowered is not better than being weak in my opinion anyway. At least by following a weak trainer, you can have a chance for growth and character development. With an overpowered trainer, you're not going to have a lot of conflict to deal with since they'd be able to brush through everything without much problems. There are other conflicts besides winning and losing, but you're not going to find much of those in a show about Pokemon training that involves various Pokemon themed competitions.

If you really want to see a lead who never loses, you're not going to be satisfied outside of poorly written TV shows and bad fan-fiction. This problem with losing you have is still quite strange and alarming. I still question how much of the show you understand at this point if you think losing is such a horrible fate that needs to be avoided. It certainly doesn't sound like you watch the show if you think Ash is constantly losing, overly weak and basically making up stuff for your arguments again.

 

[LuxrayOfTheWild]

The Elite 4 and Champions have always been depicted as trainers with skills high above normal trainers like Ash. It wouldn't really be fitting if they were struggling against someone like Ash, especially when most of the Champions are adults who would have years of experience over a ton of young trainers.

I guess someone could argue right here about Ash nearly defeating Diantha's ace, but to be fair, Ash-Greninja caught her by surprise. It was pushing it a bit, but I did think it was still exciting since its something nobody expected to happen and it showed how much Ash and Greninja grew in terms of power, not character though. He didn't win though and his chain of losses began, forcing him to adapt and learn from this, which ultimately made him grow. I don't think the situation with Diantha was as bad as Mega Charizard X, though.

Champions and Elite Four members are meant to be this way, yeah. They do have /FAR/ more experience than Ash, or even Alain. Ash is 10 still, somehow, while Alain is like what 18? Diantha meanwhile looks like she's about 45-50 I'd say. She, as well as characters such as Cynthia, Alder, Steven, Lance, and Wallace do have the years of experience on their side and I think its fair to say they've held onto this spot for a long time.

Its fun to watch a character with real flaws who sometimes loses, grows, and develop really, rather than someone who is so overpowered and never goes through any struggles.

 

[Arceus the Dragon]

So you are still on trying to use other characters to make it seem like Alain isn't as overpowered, or at least soften the blow that he is indeed overpowered. That's a pretty weak argument. Sure, Alain wouldn't defeat a region's Elite 4 Champion, although a part of me wouldn't be surprised if he could given he was able to defeat Malva and with his Mega Charizard X being as broken as it is, but that doesn't really make it any better that he's an overpowered trainer. At least Champions being overpowered is more justified than Alain's strength is in my opinion. The Elite 4 and Champions have always been depicted as trainers with skills high above normal trainers like Ash. It wouldn't really be fitting if they were struggling against someone like Ash, especially when most of the Champions are adults who would have years of experience over a ton of young trainers.

Alain really doesn't have that justification for his strength or even what Tobias had for that matter. He just is that strong because the writers went really overboard with hyping up his strength for his battles with Ash and because they really like Mega Charizard X. That isn't a good explanation for his strength and it can be annoying, as well as distracting, to the audience.

And how the heck is Ash close to overweak? I'm pretty sure that isn't a term like overpowered is either. And how is Ash constantly losing? For someone who claims that Ash is his favorite character and was emphasizing the importance of Ash getting to the Kalos League finals, this still screams anti-Ash bias with a hint of Alain favoritism. Ash does lose, but I don't think it's constantly throughout each series and certainly not within XY. Overpowered is not better than being weak in my opinion anyway. At least by following a weak trainer, you can have a chance for growth and character development. With an overpowered trainer, you're not going to have a lot of conflict to deal with since they'd be able to brush through everything without much problems. There are other conflicts besides winning and losing, but you're not going to find much of those in a show about Pokemon training that involves various Pokemon themed competitions.

If you really want to see a lead who never loses, you're not going to be satisfied outside of poorly written TV shows and bad fan-fiction. This problem with losing you have is still quite strange and alarming. I still question how much of the show you understand at this point if you think losing is such a horrible fate that needs to be avoided. It certainly doesn't sound like you watch the show if you think Ash is constantly losing, overly weak and basically making up stuff for your arguments again.

I am not making stuff up. Ash is constantly losing with several leagues losses. That proves he is not as powerful as others make him to be. I am not anti-Ash but I am not going to make him into an Arceus trainer. Alain was meant to be powerful and Ash was meant to lose the league. I don't favor Alain over Ash but if I did it is because Ash is getting overhyped over nothing. Being a trainer that loses is not a great trainer at all. It means that trainer doesn't have what it takes. Being a powerhouse is better than getting crushed repeatedly.

 

[Hidden Mew]

I guess someone could argue right here about Ash nearly defeating Diantha's ace, but to be fair, Ash-Greninja caught her by surprise. It was pushing it a bit, but I did think it was still exciting since its something nobody expected to happen and it showed how much Ash and Greninja grew in terms of power, not character though. He didn't win though and his chain of losses began, forcing him to adapt and learn from this, which ultimately made him grow. I don't think the situation with Diantha was as bad as Mega Charizard X, though.

Champions and Elite Four members are meant to be this way, yeah. They do have /FAR/ more experience than Ash, or even Alain. Ash is 10 still, somehow, while Alain is like what 18? Diantha meanwhile looks like she's about 45-50 I'd say. She, as well as characters such as Cynthia, Alder, Steven, Lance, and Wallace do have the years of experience on their side and I think its fair to say they've held onto this spot for a long time.

Its fun to watch a character with real flaws who sometimes loses, grows, and develop really, rather than someone who is so overpowered and never goes through any struggles.

I never quite liked that Ash-Greninja nearly defeated Mega Gardevoir, but catching Diantha off guard could have factored into that. Nearly defeating the Champion is at least questionable, but I agree that it's no where near as bad as Mega Charizard X's accomplishments.

I'm not sure if they've ever mentioned Alain's age. I imagine that he's at least somewhere in his teenage years. Diantha looks more like in her thirties or early forties at the most to me, but either way, she would have much more experience than someone like Ash does.

I am not making stuff up. Ash is constantly losing with several leagues losses. That proves he is not as powerful as others make him to be. I am not anti-Ash but I am not going to make him into an Arceus trainer. Alain was meant to be powerful and Ash was meant to lose the league. I don't favor Alain over Ash but if I did it is because Ash is getting overhyped over nothing. Being a trainer that loses is not a great trainer at all. It means that trainer doesn't have what it takes. Being a powerhouse is better than getting crushed repeatedly.

When you said that Ash was losing constantly, I thought that you meant all the time in general, not that he was constantly losing in the different Leagues, so that was a misunderstanding on my part. When I said that you were making stuff up, I thought it was another case like when you claimed that Ash was responsible for killing Latios and Lucario in their respective movies in order to make him look like a bad trainer and saying that he was constantly losing without clarifying that you were referring to the League reminded me of that.

I'm not trying to make Ash into an unbeatable trainer either, even though I don't know what Arceus has to do with this, but you do seem to be unnecessarily harsh with him just because he apparently isn't winning enough for you. That's why I call your argument anti-Ash with a hint of Alain favoritism. You've said before that you've been trying to be fair to both characters, but it never came off that way, including now if that is still your intent. While I could agree with the idea that fans have over hyped Ash, as well as XY in general for that matter, I wouldn't say that it's over nothing. I can see why people have been praising Ash throughout the series due to his better skills as a trainer, better battles than BW had to offer and getting as far as the finals for the first time. That isn't over hyping him over nothing.

This issue you have with the idea of losing is just insane and almost kind of concerning. You really do make it sound like losing is something horrific that trainers can never recover from. Losing doesn't necessarily mean that a trainer doesn't have what it takes. Victories have often come down to the wire or just plain luck on the other trainer's side. Ash has caught lucky breaks plenty of times. Even if it does mean that they didn't have what it takes to win that specific battle, that doesn't mean that they can improve and be ready to defeat that opponent in the future. People lose all the time. Failure is a part of life. Why should Pokemon battles be any different? The show has always emphasized that it's okay to lose and that there is always someone stronger than you out there. Sometimes you win, but sometimes you lose. You can't expect anyone to win all the time and like I said, expecting the main lead to win all the time is just plain boring. This seems like a serious problem if you can't accept that trainers sometime lose. It is a necessity from a story and character perspective.

 

[LuxrayOfTheWild]

I never quite liked that Ash-Greninja nearly defeated Mega Gardevoir, but catching Diantha off guard could have factored into that. Nearly defeating the Champion is at least questionable, but I agree that it's no where near as bad as Mega Charizard X's accomplishments.

I'm not sure if they've ever mentioned Alain's age. I imagine that he's at least somewhere in his teenage years. Diantha looks more like in her thirties or early forties at the most to me, but either way, she would have much more experience than someone like Ash does.

I feel like it did, cause she was shocked when they first synchronized and temporarily perfected it. The fight could have been handled a bit differently though, with Diantha regaining the upper hand.

Its never been explicitly stated, though he certainly looks older than Ash. I always assumed he was at least between 15 and 18, which is why I don't like people shipping him and Marin cause she looks like she's about 10 or so. Early forties seems more likely to me for Diantha. Its so hard to say cause its rarely explicitly stated. Ash and Alain certainly don't have as much experience as Diantha though, yet somehow Alain can defeat Malva which was the breaking point for me.

 

[Arceus the Dragon]

Well then I guess we can expect Ash to lose the pokemon league for another 20 years since losing is considered okay. Ash has learnt enough because he had lost many times by now so surely he would start to win?

 

[Shadao]

Well then I guess we can expect Ash to lose the pokemon league for another 20 years since losing is considered okay. Ash has learnt enough because he had lost many times by now so surely he would start to win?

The thing is that the Kalos League loss is no ordinary loss. It's a loss that is rendered meaningless considering what happens later on. The status quo comes in two parts. One is that Ash doesn't get the trophy. The second is that the person who beats him is someone who is simply better at being a trainer than he is and if it's a League rival (and not Gary Oak), he's usually better than Ash in both battle experience AND maturity.

The status quo of the anime is not really Ash never wins the League, but rather that there is Always Someone Better in spite of your accomplishments. That is what kept the Dragon Ball series going for all these years. The notion of stronger opponents to face.

Which is why I feel that XY&Z is not following the status quo despite Ash losing the Kalos League. Even though Alain won, we see that Ash is the better trainer of the two, and the one who understands the point of being a trainer. The latest episode showcases it by having Ash be the voice of guidance and hope to Alain when he succumbs to despair. His fury and rage towards Lysandre is unlike anything I've seen out of Satoshi throughout the series. It makes me tremble with awe, respect, and fear at the same time. He leads the attack while Alain follows. That's not something you would expect out of a typical champion scenario like this. Usually, it's Ash who follows the champion's guidance, not the other way around.

Kalos is the region that no one really looks down upon Ash. Rather most want to be like Ash, inspired by Ash, and so forth. If there is any Ash that can be considered a master, it's the XY&Z Ash. If they really wanted to keep the status quo intact, they shouldn't have made Ash into this kind of trainer.