This is more of a hypothetical rather than anything that affects my shooting path or current build. Nor am I really attempting to say that I think people should abandon their pursuit of of a more perfect slide cut.
(From my reading at least) it seems like the settled consensus on slide mounted optics is hands down "the lower the better" with everyone wanting to mill deeper and deeper. LTT completely reengineering the the locking block to achieve this being probably the best example. Glock competitors debating an MOS system over an aftermarket cut to get a little deeper seems not uncommon as well.
However, when I look at all these super high dollar open guns running right at the edge of human performance using frame mounted optics, no one really seems to much consider it a problem that the optic is sitting considerably higher. Understandably they do this for logistics reasons, sight tracking during recoil, and equipment longevity. But open shooters just don't seem to much care that their optic rides so high.
Given that the open division has pretty much the fastest shooters acquiring effective sight pictures the absolute fastest with the least room for time errors, it doesn't seem to much affect them that their optic is riding a few millimeters higher.
I can understand that the closer the dot is to to the slide, the easier the transition would be from irons. But I'm wondering if it really matters.
Pic of JJ Racaza with an open gun:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=...AAAAAdAAAAABAJ
Aside from carry and concealment issues, does the mount height of of the optic really matter "on the clock" once you practice a bit with your rig?