Alright, um, look, here's the thing about using usage as a pure argument.There's a big difference between the git gud argument and the don't give me your cherrypicked, anecdotal evidence of a player being an idiot argument. My argument is the latter. OP argued that Lando-I doesn't need to carry Knock Off, it just needs Knock Off support from another poke to beat the Lando-I counters. Okay, sure. But people aren't going to be Keeping Latis, Chansey, Cress, etc on Bisharps, Torn-Ts, etc. It's a bad argument. He expects people not to play smart, and that's his reasoning as to why Lando-I is "too strong". It's bad reasoning.
From here:
http://www.smogon.com/stats/2015-04/moveset/oususpecttest-1695.txt
| Earth Power 98.966% | | Sludge Wave 70.583% | | Hidden Power Ice 66.481% | | Rock Polish 42.541% | | Psychic 31.134% | | Focus Blast 29.494% | | Stealth Rock 23.829% | | Knock Off 12.476% | | Rock Slide 10.079% | | Other 14.416% | +-------------------
I made a mistake, FB is actually at 29%. But it still less than 1/3rd of Lando-Is.
You're right, RP isn't used on half the Lando-Is, but it is also the 4th most used move in the game. Also I won't stop using usage as an argument, the fact that people deny it and say it's only useful in how much something is used is RIDICULOUS. If a move isn't being used as much as another one, that is a strong indicator of how viable it is in the meta. It is the only SOLID evidence that STATISTICALLY shows viability. I am not arguing that usage=viablity, as so many people think I have. In fact, if you read any of my posts, I actually agree and say they don't equal each other. But usage is the STRONGEST INDICATOR of viability that we can see in STATISTICAL EVIDENCE. There is literally no other stronger form of evidence in defining viability. If people thought Knock Off was viable in this meta, it would at least be at 33-35%. Absolutely ridiculous that people are arguing that 12.5% of Lando's that carry Knock Off are a threat to the meta. Lando's carrying KO and giving up RP means they lose to a million other checks that they would rather not lose to. It makes Lando-I an inefficient late game sweeper-- and that's the main reason he's S-ranked.
People are stupid.
You can argue all you want about what's used more than what, and how usage is... apparently a solid indicator for what's viable; but the fact is this assumes that every player that constitutes the usage statistics knows exactly what they're doing and that they are definitely good players. This is false. As stated, if this was the case then we wouldn't have the horrendous Hitmonchan and Ambipom in RU, and we wouldn't have had Donphan in OU for a while. I think at one point I even saw a third of Blastoise in OU weren't even holding Blastoisinite.
You're dealing with humans here which makes this statistical data a lot more subjective than you might think. Now of course this doesn't account for everything; and as you indeed said usage can generally be used as an indicator of what is viable; but again, Hitmonchan is RU and Donphan was OU. Usage stats can not be relied on to perfectly exemplify what are the best sets in the meta, so please stop stretching what limited uses the usage stats actually have.