I quite agree with Centaurus that the landing process should be adequate for all runways – with the particular emphasis placed on those that are more performance limiting… and I certainly wouldn’t want to stand toe-to-toe in a flying technique argument with the likes of Joe Zizovsky! For performance limited runways, I think I understand completely his preference for maintaining Vref+5 knots to the initiation of the flare – particularly were he describing initiating the flare at 10 to 15 feet above the runway with the “aiming” point on the runway something short of the 1000-foot fixed distance markers (FDM). In that particular instance, I would presume Mr. Zizovsky would not appreciate taking 3 seconds to reach the flare attitude (what I’m calling the level flight attitude). In fact, I would suspect his preference would be more in the neighborhood of 0.5 to 1.0 second flare and something similar from flare to touchdown. Sawing the power levers to idle – “whack bang” – with the initiation of that 0.5 to 1.0 second flare, would be perfectly appropriate when landing on a performance limited runway. Such an abrupt change of attitude and change in power, would allow the airspeed to bleed down more quickly; initiating the flare closer to the runway would cause you to reach the landing attitude closer to the runway; and with the aim point short of the FDM, the process would likely result in placing the MLG tires ON the 1000-foot FDM, at the appropriate attitude and airspeed. After all, THAT is what the B737 was originally designed to do – be able to get into and out of airport runways that simply would be inadequate for the B727 and B720 aircraft. However, relaxing this particular method of approach and landing just slightly would be perfectly acceptable, and appropriate, when the runway isn’t so performance limited.