The problem is that a Random Number Generator, by definition, cannot be weighted toward any certain outcome (that is "calibrated") because at that point, it's obviously not Random.
That's why it'd then be called an AI, not an RNG; the term "calibrated RNG" is like saying "opaque window"-- if it's opaque, it's not really a window.
Of course, it's all semantics, but you REALLY should know what RNG stands for...
Random Number Generator = generating random numbers.
Calibrated = certain outputs produce certain outcomes.
For rock paper scissors, since the odds are 50/50, that means 50% of all outputs must indicate a win for Player A, and 50% of all outputs must indicate a win for Player B. Could be 1-50 = A wins, 51-100 = B wins, could be odd = A wins, even = B wins, as long as that condition is met, the RNG is properly calibrated. If the odds were instead 75/25, it'd still be easy to indicate what random outputs mean what. And because a randomly generated number followed by a check to indicate the result that number indicates produces exactly the same results as a rock paper scissors match, and can play rock paper scissors as well as an actual person, it is not competitive.
All this talk of RNGs and AIs and such though has caused us to not only miss the forest for the trees, but to crash into one George of the Jungle style. Not to mention a certain someone is ignoring it all anyways...
So getting back to the actual topic of defining the word uncompetitive, aside from all this it would be easier to find definitions of competitive, that if reversed mean noncompetitive.
Competitive strategies tend to minimize luck. This is why Evasion and OHKO moves are banned, and it is why Flamethrower is generally preferred over Fire Blast.
Competitive means two or more people who are at least decent, and playing to win against each other. Worded this way because not everyone is a stellar player - one or both of them could be learning, for example. But as long as they're at least trying, as opposed to using an in game team, or just not caring if they win or lose its competitive.
The definitions though have to be reversible to mean non competitive. For example saying a tournament is competitive isn't a way of finding an uncompetitive definition, because while the tournament most likely is competitive, are matches outside of tournaments necessarily not competitive? Of course not!
And while we probably already do have a definition for uncompetitive, it might not be the same definition, leading to talking past each other. That's why this thread is here, or at least that's why I thought this thread is here. Hopefully this at least will kill the spinning in circles, so that something can actually be accomplished.