While I am almost unequivocally opposed to using anecdotes rather than statistics to further a cause, I think I need to side with the "too risky" crowd. The reason being the same as Dan stated, why is it worth it?

In each of the times that proponents of the low save have justified the measures, they have said that they would only do that in the case where there is a perfectly good landing spot available below them. I'm not saying you aren't capable of pulling it off or making it work, but as a CFI-G, it reminds me of my space-shuttle type landings i used to do that looked really cool and smooth, but are very difficult for a student to replicate. I no longer do them, because it is far more important that pilots understand what is considered a safe standard, and what is a pilot accepting additional risk for a perceived benefit.

In this case, especially due to the shear and turbulence that is almost always present on decent days, i put this in the latter category. Not saying Ag or any of you others are not capable of flying it correctly, but I would never teach my student that thermalling a 200ft over a good landing spot is worth it, because mistakes happen, and our standard as a community should always be to allow ourselves more than one mistake's room away from never coming home to our families.