Nice try Dude - but wrong. My objection to baby airline pilots is light aircraft pilots who fly approaches at 3 degrees using PAPIS and the like. This is not the way to operate light aircraft.
As for adding extra speed I only stated that for power off approaches to steep slopes - do try to keep up!
Anyone flying a 3 degree approach is likely in a nosedragger to bounce or wheel barrow on an undulating runway. The aircraft simply has too much energy (speed!) to stop flying. Try that in a taildragger and you will get a huge balloon. To achieve a genuine holdoff in ground effect you will not be flying a Vs +30% - there is every likelihood you will be around Vs.
If you fly a steeper approach, or you achieve a genuine holdoff rather than just 'flying onto the ground' you are flying on 'the back of the drag curve' - whether you like to think about it as that or not. The genuine hold off however consumes a lot of runway, because the 3 degree approach gives you such a speed margin to start with. You are perfectly correct that adding power from that sort of aproach just increases the length of runway - it does - but if you are flying over a large concave area that is exactly what you need - otherwise the sink rate will push the wheels up through the wing/fuselage/whatever.
In the flare (a proper flare that is), the aircraft has much less power than it needs, the speed is decaying rapidly, landing is imminent, if not beaten by a stall. Now all this happens very close to the ground so you don't stall - but many do sink very rapidly!
Aerobatic has filled in the details nicely.
The summary is that adding speed on uneven surfaces adds complication and danger, fly the attitude use the engine and control your landing point.
Sorry for ranting, but landing fast is actually an oxymoron.