I hope you guys take s small step back and reflect on this in general terms - and possibly realise that this is actually not a good thing for the game, from a big picture perspective. Just like we've had big problems with farming and prize distribution at the lower end of the scale with level 1 bots (which I have openly defended all the new changes on the blockchain recently), the same applies at the top of the leaderboards, or more specifically with players who are playing too many premium decks at the expense of the overall health of the game and it's overall future...there is a lot of talk about a sustainable in-game economy lately and this also needs to become a part of the discussion imo...Especially if gaining and then retaining new players is of the utmost importance (no matter what level of investment they choose), then the behaviour at the higher end needs to change also. This is not helping in the retention of players in any way, and it's actually anti-competitive, when you have to play and beat a player multiple times in a tournament, when some players only get one shot. I can go into a lot more detail about why, but I will leave it there for now.
I know I'm going to get scolded for this comment, but I have always been one to speak of unpopular things...even though it's unpopular with the wrong or influential people/circles and it always gets me into trouble. So I may as well be the one to start the discussion, since nobody else will do it openly for fear of kick back....I can guarantee you that i'm not the only person who thinks this is a problem. But, since I don't really care about my tattered reputation anymore I may as well put myself in the firing line once again.
I know I'm gonna get hate for this, but so be it.
I agree with much of what you say. And I think it has a lot to do with the following 2 points (one of which is being addressed, but the other has not YET):
the prevalence of so many shit decks in the higher league matches... when they are comfortable that we have true peer to peer competition, then I think that will change (or show where all the abuse is happening).
the reward structure is heavily weighted to the top. While its better than it used to be, basically the top 16 decks get paid the most. I would think they need to re-work this concept in the future if they want to have more than 50 large decks competing for those 16 slots... Otherwise you are right, the game will go nowhere as the top 16 eventually wear down all other competition.
No scolding or hate!
FYI: I'm actually in the process of dropping a delegated account that I play. And I know @jacekw has been on the verge of also dropping an account.
There are two main challenges to your idea:
It's a major step towards increased centralization (just like with the occasional proposals people make that Splinterlands should ban bots).
It is extremely hard to adjudicate. Without requiring extremely invasive software, there aren't any good ways to determine the difference between one player multi-accounting and multiple people in the same household all playing their own accounts. IP address solutions don't work because people can just spoof their IP addresses.
I do prefer that people are more upfront and transparent about their multi-accounting (or their botting). But the problem is that a lot of so-called solutions are imperfect and just result in people continuing the same behavior, just in secret.