Alright so this question is a little hard to describe, but I think you’re the best person to answer it. Let me construct a scenario. Say you have two rattata, a pokeball, and a master ball[.]You toss the master ball, the rattata gets caught, as the master ball can never fail. You toss the pokeball, and while you’re unsure, let’s say the rattata got caught in this instance. Now, both rattata were caught. But a pokeball’s defining factor for its quality is its chance of success. (cont. ->)

This question continues:

“And in that instance, both balls were equally successful. But here’s the rub, in that you can’t re-use a pokeball. So how would you know if the master ball were really as perfect as advertised, (i[.]e. it will catch any pokemon without fail) if in that instance it was just as effective as a pokeball? If you caught a rattata with a pokeball, then doesn’t that mean you might have used a master ball? My question is, how can we know the master ball is really effective?

Oh! And another question, springboarding off of the one about what the pokeball means to the world in this series.

What would a master ball mean to your theory that pokemon battle trainers to test worthiness? That despite its resolve to test the trainer, it can be captured no matter what kind of fight it puts up, if it gets the chance to do so?”

 My answer is as follows:

Well, in the instance of the Rattata, you can’t tell.  That’s why you wouldn’t test a Master Ball against something like a Rattata; you’d test it against something a Pokéball probably isn’t going to catch, like a Dragonair or a Rhydon.  Testing a Pokéball and a Master Ball against a pair of Rattata is a little like testing a Roman Candle and a tactical nuke by strapping bits of paper to each one and seeing what happens.  Either way, the paper is reduced to ashes, but you wouldn’t conclude based on this test that a Roman Candle is equivalent in firepower to a nuclear bomb.

I’m not sure that actually resolved your question, but you might be better off consulting a statistician for a more thorough answer.

Anyway, your other question.  Assuming I’m right about what battling and capturing a wild Pokémon actually means, a Master Ball is a terrible, terrible thing to use.  It basically destroys the idea of a partnership between a trainer and a Pokémon and relegates the Pokémon to the position of a passive subordinate.  This really isn’t entirely above board, and it lends an interesting perspective to the ways Master Balls turn up in some of the games: in Red and Blue, the Master Ball is the object of Team Rocket’s whole Silph Co. campaign; in Gold and Silver, Professor Elm remarks that they’re only given to trusted researchers; in Ruby and Sapphire, it’s in Archie/Maxie’s office in the Team Aqua/Magma lair; in Diamond and Pearl it’s given to you by Cyrus, of all people, and if that doesn’t send up red flags then I don’t know what does!  Oh, yeah, and in Black and White, Professor Juniper is like “hey, look what I got you!  Isn’t it shiny?” so whatevs.

What you haven’t asked me, and the point where my model currently falls down, is how other kinds of Pokéball like Ultra Balls, Lure Balls, Dusk Balls and so on fit into the scheme of things.  At present, I simply don’t know.  Clearly they influence the Pokémon somehow, but how they do it – and what the implications for the series’ internal morality might be – is beyond me.  For now.