Any type of build I do along the lines of that motor is going in a bracket car, and pretty much all of my customers want motors that are relatively easy on parts/low-ish maintenance.

So, I end up coming at the cam situation from a different angle for that type of application.
The 470 TF testing showed that a faster valve opening rate and more lift do not always bring with them extra power. They pretty much always bring a little(a lot?) of extra wear and tear on the valvetrain.

Instead of looking at how much "more" power can be had from a higher lift, faster rate cam, and/or higher ratio rockers, I often think about how much power will not using something with a fast rate and high lift cost me? And, will the car still run the desired number while using a valvetrain that's easy(er) on parts?

Many times you're messing with 20-30hp(or less) difference between something that will live hundreds of passes with valvetrain parts and spring pressures that are more "middle of the road".
On a typical low-9 to low-8 second car, 20-30hp doesn't change the ET very much, but can make a noticeable difference in the maintenance and parts replacement costs and schedule.

Another aspect of running the motor in the car vs the dyno is, sometimes the cam is determined more by what the typical, or necessary rpm requirements are to get the combination to work well, and not solely by what makes the biggest number on the dyno.