John T (and Mutt) thanks for that. Sorry, the AFM graphs and the old manual graphs can be taken as one in the same for the purpose of my question.
Yeh we primarily use the old landing graphs for landing-dist calculations and use the QRH-distance tables as a back up ("what distance I legaly require" vs "what distance Boeing expects me to use"). As you say there is no fudge-factoring in QRH-derived distances. But increasingley I hear 737 pilots using the QRH-ref distance tables as the sole source of LDR, even though these tables are headed ADVISORY INFORMATION. The old graphs are not "advisory" in the legal sense. This not only applys to non-normal configuration distances but normal distances too.
Still the question remains: will the sole use of QRH-derived LDRs stand-up legaly at the Tribunal and/or the Beak after the over-run? The implication here is that Boeing made the old graphs redundant (please chuck out and replace with....) but the AFM graphs (almost the same as the old graphs) of course remain over-riding.