Perhaps I can help a little here.
The new hook shape was first shown very soon after the initial arresting trials revealed the problem. My feeling is that the LM team originally went for a proven and reliable hook tip shape (Hornet), and it's highly probable that this design was approved by the USN Navair team at a very early stage. The Hornet hook offered reliable traps with low probability of arresting gear pendant damage.
As I'be posted before, the original F-35C arresting gear design complied with all the standards and specifications required. The 'hook to main gear' distance was not specified.
My guess (and thats all it is) is that as soon as the problem appeared, an LM/Navair team decided to try another type of hook shape that had worked in the past, accepting the increased possibility of arresting gear damage from the sharper hook point. It appears to have worked, as the aircraft would not have been allowed anywhere near the deck unless it had passed a fairly stringent series of tests.
What this illustrates is that the USN and Navair tend to operate in a fairly empirical fashion (if it's worked before, it will work this time). Many of their standards and specifications do little more than codify previous successful design solutions. (Large chunks of Def Stan 00-970 did the same thing for many years, and continue to do so today). Given the complexities and uncertainties involved in trying to accurately model a whipping arresting wire, it's an understandable approach.
Hope this helps
Engines