The concrete block tests and the "if I'm ever attacked by a piece of concrete" crew around here are one of the givens just about any time a thread on Busse comes up, and I swear that someday I'm going to pound the point they are missing through their heads. When you test something for durability, especially something that is made to be durable, you have to use extreme tests in order to accelerate the wear/tear. When mattress companies test new spring setups, they have giant rollers that crush, compress, and generally abuse them to try and simulate--in a few hours--the cumulative damage of several years of normal use. And I'm sure there is some jackass who'll read this and say, "Well I'll be sure to buy one of those mattresses if I ever need to put a giant roller on a bed" but I'm hoping that the majority can fathom that the reason for doing things this way is so that five or six years don't have to go by before you know if it's a good mattress. Sure, they're all comfortable when they're new---the question is how are they after they've been slept on for awhile?
It's the same thing here. Yes, the concrete blocks can sort of simulate an accidental hit to a rock or the ground, but first and foremost this is a test designed to exceed normal use, to speed up wear and tear and see how the knives stand up. If I take two well made, heavy duty fixed blades and go out to clear green wood and light vegetation, cut up meat and vegetables, open packages, make fuzz sticks, etc. and hope to get a really good comparison in terms of durability, I'll probably have really solid numbers to present in three or four years. All of these things are a walk in the park for a well made knife that was built to do them, so trying to pull out the differences using these as the testing means is more than a tad inefficient. Chopping into concrete blocks, cutting up dozens of feet of rope or cardboard, saltwater spray tests...these are all the same thing. Putting the knives through MORE than they'll ever likely need to do, to see how they stand up. And what is true in extremes will generally be true outside of them. If knife A doesn't chip/crack/deform/fail as badly or quickly as knife B in extreme tests, then knife A will also stand up to normal use better than knife B.
Busse has never said, "If your knife can't reproduce these results, it's crap." Instead it's, "Our knives can do this, if you think yours can too, step up." I have other knives that will not perform nearly so well in a concrete block chop, that will outperform the Busses in other areas. So what? I have different applications where I'll use one versus the other.
And yes, the knife versus prybar routine. Oh goody. Yes, a prybar will pry much better than any knife, if you have serious prying to do. Well, if I'm out where I'm carrying a big knife, I generally don't have any serious prying I need to do, but not having to worry about the structural integrity of my knife if I want to put some pressure on it sure is nice. I was segmenting an elk a few years back (because I couldn't carry him whole) and had to do some forcing/twisting to split up the hip joints. I wasn't carrying a Busse, but my knife did have some beef to its blade, and I didn't have to worry about breaking it in half while I was working. Yes a specific prying tool would have possibly done this one thing more easily, but my chunky knife did all I needed it to do, and was also useful in other things where a two or three foot steel rod would have been useless. And that knife plus my little skinner together don't weigh 1/4 what a prybar would.
So please, if a type of knife doesn't fit your needs, then don't buy it. But this "I must validate my preferences by attempting to discredit everything else" bit gets rather tiresome.