MAP/EMAP vs MAP tuning

I've just been learning a little about using MAP/EMAP as the load axis for VE tables, and it seems like it's better in every way than using MAP, by compensating for altitude and intake/exhaust changes without retuning. However, it doesn't seem to be very widely used from what I've seen, is there a reason why?

I understand it's not suitable as a load axis for ignition and lambda target tables; would the normal approach be to use MAP as the load axis for these?

Hi, Jaik unless you are doing huge altitude changes in your race car this method is not used often at all. but if used I would use MAP for the lambda and MAP for ignition but I would struggle to tell you why convincingly, just how I have always done it and I would add compensation for altitude if I was getting serious and wanting a top consistent power run.

Regards Ross