So, because the frost tree hasn't found it's sweet spot and best rotation yet (because it has a lot more options than unholy and blood) you automatically jump to saying that frost is the worst of the trees. There have been a number of people who have posted very good results with frost, but because 90% of the DK base is either unholy or blood because those trees already have "optimal" rotations everyone automatically assumes that unholy and blood are just better. Of course nearly all of the "Best DPS" reports are going to be unholy or blood when 98% of the DKs in high end raiding guilds that aren't tanking are unholy or blood. It's simply an issue of scale, statistics and proportions. When you have as much possible deviation in damage as DKs do because of crits, then if you have 1000 people playing unholy and 1 playing frost then obviously one of those 1000 people is going to go far beyond the standard deviation and post some ridiculously huge numbers while the 1 person trying frost has very little chance to break outside the standard deviation for that spec. There are simulations made and those take into account a huge number of facts but it's impossible for them to really simulate in-game situations like movement, multiple mobs, burst times, etc. Therefore you should listen to the word of those who are performing well (even if just in their standards) and glean information from it that you think is legitimate and ignore what you think is biased then test yourself and see how it performs for you.

With that said, it's not constructive to come into a forum where people come to discuss optimizing a preferred tree and saying that tree isn't competitive and it's all futile. The purpose is again to optimize what we have and if Blizzard changes the tree to be a DW tree, then people will once again test and see what's optimal again and again as long as things are being changed. It is completely against the goal of this entire forum to bash a spec and say we shouldn't do anything until Blizzard changes it. It doesn't matter if we are competitive from an "OP-glyph" or broken talents or efficient rotation. The goal is to maximize what we have with what we were given and if your results aren't to your liking then you have the option to try something else. I come and read this forum because even though I'm not able to play currently due to work-load, I still like to keep up with what the new rotations/BiS and such so that when I do play again I'll have ideas about what to do and it is aggrivating to have to filter through trolling in order to get to where people are actually showing sims/math/testing/theory on what I actually came to the thread to read. So please, if you're going to troll, then at least show math supporting your trolling so as to be a productive yet discontent member of society.

Im regular 10/61 unholy since uludar but it seems to be dropping behind our Rogues in single target of late and im finding it really boring. So i want to try blood, but my gear is 2 x8.5 + furious t2 weapon and mix of arp gear, first of all is this the right kind of setup or should i go 4/5 valorous or something? I also allways found Rune weapon incredibly clunky and not well designed for disease blood, therefore was wondering if a 50/21 spec with UB (given the amount of trash on bosses) would be viable.

Glyphs would be death, UB, Ds and Vh sigil or something. Gonna get some bull shit hand held infraction just for asking something which hasn't been mentioned but meh any help would be great.

I just had a look at the updated Sample Output for 3.1.2:

SampleOutputT8 - simulationcraft - Google Code

There is no ranking for 51/7/13 or 15/51/5.
In Aldriana's spreadsheet 51/7/13 is higher rated with late Ulduar gear (4c T8), and the Sample Output works with BiS lists, so why 51/13/7 comes ahead?

Curiously enough, this same trinket was not only discovered, but also discussed ad nauseum, about three pages ago.