The result that caught my attention was the relatively high level of spending possible using the "Annuitize Floor & Aggressive Discretionary" approach. Its spending rates are within 5% of the highest (Guyton-Klinger) decision rules approach, even though it's more closely related to the "safety first" camp.
The 'take away' for me is that, if one has (SS, pension, etc) or purchases (annuity) income sources to cover their floor expenses, that retiree can spend a relatively high percentage of initial wealth with what I'd describe as a relatively high level of confidence. This is because: (1) floor expenses are covered, (2) sequence of returns risk is highly mitigated, and (3) having a covered floor would likely help to preclude poor investment behavior [buy high/sell low].
Of course, there's a price for this (primarily loss of liquidity) if one uses as much of NW (40%) to purchase an annuity as in Pfau's example. But, if part/much of the floor expenses are already covered by SS and/or pension, then annuitizing a smaller percentage might be attractive to more retirees.