Having read and re-read the link you sent about Vuichard's web page, and having looked at the testimonies regarding departure from the VRS, I am genuinely beginning to wonder if there is a difference in translation here between european definitions and ours.
For the same reasons many of us get confused/mixed up over:
SWP and PS,
and
LTE and LTA
I think Vuichard et al is using VRS to cover IVRS.
Just think about it. He harps on about side slipping out of the tunnel of vortices below the tip path plane and making a miraculous recovery between: "20 - 50 feet".
Let's analyse this shall we - IF Vuichard insists he is talking about FULLY DEVELOPED VRS, we would have an aircraft descending at around 3,4,5000 feet per minute, oscillating around pitch, roll and yaw and he then swiftly drags the cab sideways out of the disc effect and arrests this descent and wayward aircraft movement within 20 to 50 feet. That would suggest a massive stop effectively, of the entire descending helicopter which in reality would break something, I would suggest!
This leads me to suspect that all along, Mr Vuichard is really discussing IVRS where (even in asociated videos) he rarely descends greater than 1 or 2000fpm. His beautiful web based video looks like a descent of hundreds of feet - maximum and a relatively stable helicopter platform.
So, in summary: If Mr V really means IVRS, yes, his technique would work (although even then, 20-50 feet halt distance is still unlikely).
But if he insists he is demonstrating FDVRS, he is either:
A liar.
Stupid.
Incompetent.