One thing in particular in the article about the "11.5:1 CR"??? engine that caught my eye was how did a cam with an almost 10 degree later IVC point create more cranking pressure? (cam tests 1 & 2)(220psi vrs 225psi) Must have been a typo right?
Also that it wasn't a very realistic comparision to real world street application as the smaller cammed engines dynamic compression would be way too high for pump gas as previously mentioned & IMO. I'm sure your aware that the compression should be lower for smaller duration cams, and higher CR for long duration cams, so that by just swapping cams its not really a valid test of potential, just demonstrates that longer durations move peak torque up in the rpm range. Also that since the compression wasn't optimised for each cam average power/torque numbers are misleading IMO.