To me it sounds like people are overthinking the flotation.
If the boat is not holed, and righted in a reasonable amount of time, then it doesn't matter what backup flotation you are using. The primary flotation is the air in the tanks (or more correctly, the volume of the tanks).
Backup flotation comes into play only if the tanks are no longer airtight. This can happen over time (but then you should try to fix that) or when the boat is holed (perhaps during a collision leading to a capsize).
Normally, the thinking would be that such conditions happen more rarely, and that therefore, the design target for the backup flotation could be a bit more limited (focused on preventing the boat from sinking, less focused on getting it to right as easily as with full airtank volume).
Getting close to the same amount of flotation makes sense, but worrying about the last few percent does not (in my view). (The most likely damage to a hull would be a jagged crack, not a nice open hole, that's just my guess, though. I've had my boat "gored" once, but never capsized, so what do I know )
Worrying about flotation after an "the front fell off" scenario seems, well, not pointless, but, yes, that's definitely something I would see in the realm of true "last ditch emergency". This is addressed, partially, by having three tanks to begin with, so my expectation was that even if the front fell off, there would be a part of the boat still floating.
If I was to enter the Texas200 or a similar long-distance venture, I might place higher demands on backup and last-ditch solutions, because the consequences are more severe, but I think even in those contexts, I would first worry about mast-head flotation, because a capsize from which I couldn't recover would be everything as bad.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not arguing against doing a decent job with flotation, but for doing a bit of risk analysis and prioritizing things.