I'm not sure what the video tells us about "premium bullets",other than one deer was hit on the edge of the vitals at almost 400 yards,at one velocity level and ran a couple of hundred yards (or whatever) before expiring. It happens.
Before condemning tougher bullets we might want a weighted average on lots of animals shot at various distances. Also, judging bullets based on hits around the fringes of vitals never made much sense to me because I have never seen it make much of a difference,whether premium or C&C if hits are on the edge or out of the vital zone. Bad hits are bad hits regardless of the bullet used.
I have seen smaller animals like doe antelope literally disemboweled, their tiny bodies and thin skins exploding like popped balloons from rapidly expanding bullets.They went as far as a woodchuck hit with a Swift..but that's the exception; hardly a "rule " to live by.
I'm not sure what "premium results" are,since the shot that dumps them in their tracks at close range may take longer to be affective at longer distance,due to less dramatic expansion,less cavitation , smaller would channel.
The advantage of many "premiums" is frequently reliable penetration coupled with adequate expansion across pretty broad velocity ranges but expansion will diminish as distance increases. I bet that same bullet planted a bit further forward, lower,and angled through the center of the lungs into the off side shoulder/upper leg bones would have ended things right there,or at least more quickly.
The problem with faster and more frangible expansion is that it may be too fast, and too frangible on closer shots...we may leave penetration on the table.Hard to get everything "just right".But a good rule is that animals are killed best with surgically placed bullets.
Bullet performance is sometime pretty mysterious! Lumping premiums together under one generic code is dicey business today, too,since even they vary in materials, expansion and penetration characteristics,etc etc.
