I'm not sure why you are so sceptical about this.
I'm not being sceptical about anything.
I'm merely pointing out: (a) that the CAAP is not the rule and (b) I've never joined above 1,500' AGL unless I've stuffed up and (c) it's never caused a problem for a 'high performance aircraft'.
Every high performance aircraft I come across will fly the circuit at 1500' AGL. I'm not sure what part of the country you fly in, but in my neck of the woods you get anything from kingairs to 737s in the circuit, and they are at 1500 AGL.
We do, indeed, fly in different necks of the woods.
In my neck the pilots of 'high performance aircraft' usually do straight ins or base joins. Continuous descents. Professionals being professionals.
On a side note, if there is a high performance aircraft in the circuit, you probably wouldn't being over flying the field anyway, because: a) they wouldn't want an aircraft overflying them only 500' above as this may cause a TCAS advisory ...
Whattha?
So now the 2,000' in the CAAP isn't enough? Should it be 3,000'?
And what "they wouldn't want" determines my overfly altitude? Are "they" in charge?
We are clearly in different necks of the woods, if not different planes of consciousness.
... and b) there's no need to overfly as you will know what the duty runway is based on the aircraft already in the circuit so you can just join behind the other aircraft.
That depends on my judgment. The pilot of the 'high performance aircraft' may be able to land on a runway in wind conditions that may not be suitable for the aircraft I'm flying, or with which I may not be comfortable.
But rest assured: Choosing a different runway hasn't resulted in my being head to head with a 'high performance aircraft' on approach.