I feel this thread lacks a summary a bit.
Obviously I understand that everything can be done in many ways, after reading through this, but the factory approach has emissions as nr 1.
For an approach that favors power/torque more than emissions, I would based on my research:
Leave EGT threshold for LAMBTS close to stock, and use LAMBTS as it was intended, for component protection.
Use LAMFA, and make it mimic the driving pattern. Usually the driver will go WOT at low RPM's all the time, but it is a bad idea to enrich there, as it will hurt fuel economy. I would tune LAMFA to enrich to around lean best torque, over a certain RPM where turbo spool up becomes instantaneous, and where the driver does not go unless he is flooring the car.
To get from lean best torque, to rich best torque and a bit below it (around 12:1), I would use KFLAMKR/KFLAMKRL.

So during a WOT pull (obviously they are all combined, but to illustrate my idea):
14.7 to 13.3 - regulated mostly by LAMFA initially at high requested load and RPM > turbo lag threshold
13.3 to 12.3ish - regulated further by knock control
12.3 and lower - caused by component protection.

LAMFA is used to get maximum torque from the engine during high demand conditions and to reduce the initial onset of knock during gear changes, KFLAMKR/KFLAMKRL are used for further enrichment to make best torque and LAMBTS is used to protect engine components. This way the ECU is geared towards best torque in all high load/high rpm conditions, while still being economical and having good emissions when the car is being babied.

Just throwing some ideas around, feedback appreciated.

That's a good summary. I haven't had time to further analyse what method other than LAMFA and LAMBTS Revo has used to go below lean best torque at WOT but the lamfaw-lamkr method certainly seems valid enough (Tony uses it). I need to do a lot more logging when I get a new battery for my laptop, but lamfawkr_w isn't currently in the list of variables in ME7logger.

Thanks for a good summary of the position. Once I've deduced Revo's strategy in full, I'll update the 'understanding tuning' guide with a summary of all the salient points of this excellent thread.

TTQS

Agreed. Especially on 91. "prevent" is definitely more the wrong word.

On 91 oct, you need that much fuel preemptively just to STAY above 0 degs at peak tq.

thanks for the advice... i will definitely try to back off to 12 AFR again, but on my car, i was making more power from more timing all the way to 11.5 on 91oct.

i also tried less peak boost, but that also didn't work.

I have noticed the same with a few 1.8T AMK & BAM engines, when going richer to 11.9:1 - 12:1 I tend to get more timing correction than 12.4:1 at the top end.  Used to keep adding fuel to reduce CFs, but over the last year or so I have found its not always the case.

I tune via LAMFA 99% request set to 1  just over 3000rpm then .89 upto 4500rpm then .84 to the red line, then all other load point over 75% I will tune to .91 upto 4500rpm and .85 to the red line.  All values below 75% set to 1 and  .89 over 5000rpm.

Then KFLBTS to dump me to .81 with egt threshold set to my own findings, stock manifold, stock cat stock exhaust a lower trigger vs performance manifold and full turbo back exhaust a  temp higher trigger.   I find the 1.8T engine make better power and run less correction the closer i get to 12.4:1

prj: i agree on the whole with your approach (and Tony's approach).

All I am saying is that rich best torque isn't rich enough for 91oct if you expect to get ANY timing at peak torque.

On 91 oct, you have to pre-emptively go super rich. I know, it sucks, but thats 91oct.

The RS4's TAGBTS is 750, not 700.

I've logged it quite a bit now, since it's my daily hack

The TAGBTS comes from turbocharger specification. The K04's were engineered to withstand higher EGT temperatures than K03's AFAIK.
It's really there to protect the turbos.

lol, its quite counter-intuitive.  truth is that you are adding more fuel to an explosion.  LOL....