I normally don't mention names in responses but this once I will and hope no offense is taken.
Paul Davis makes an argument that his testing in a decathlon has convinced him that aileron should not be used to pick up a wing in a stall. I feel that this is the kind of flawed logic that can get people hurt. I have flown a decathlon and it shares virtually no flight characteristics of my lancair.
I have a theory( and only a theory) that the rule about aileron for recovery came from some wwII warbirds. There are some planes Ive flown that do react badly to the use of aileron during stalls (some even in slow flight) this has led to the passing on of the airborne urban legend of no aileron stall recovery.(who could question a god flying warbirds.)
I believe that what works works. When I got my check out in the CAF to fly warbirds I took two check flights in the AT 6. During on stall recovery I moved the ailerons and had to listen to a 2 minute dissertation an how lucky I was to be alive. Then to demonstrate his point the grizzled veteran demonstrated keeping the stick full aft and controlling the resultant departures with only rudder. I then did it his way and he was happy. Then I asked him if I could try the same maneuver with ailerons. He said yes but go a little higher so Il have room to recover from the spin.Using all the controls I was able to hold the plane to a much less sever maneuver with more control. My check pilot said ya but a fighter will kill ya if you do that. In some cases he was right and we use the 6 to simulate fighters(train like you fly fly like you train) but As planes get more diverse I think we need to realize that no trainer is going to duplicate all the traits of higher performance aircraft. You must fly the plane your in.
dave