Selecting power valve method Holley 4160

Stall rpm is arguably just a way to compare similarly manufactured torque converters.
Its common use I think obscures the operation and effect of converters on engine load.
I'm no expert on this. In general I think its safe to say that a lower stall rpm will have higher load on the engine at lower rpms. This means the engine will not tolerate less well tuned timing and AFR in the lower load, lower rpm ranges.

But the stall number itself may or may not tell us much. If we have a Turbo Action 10" called a 3000 rpm stall versus a 2600 stall, what does that mean?
Are those the nbumbers we'll see on a brake stall test? is it the rpm it will flash to when the vehicle is moving at WOT?
We know that the engine power and torque will effect even the brake stall when actually installed into a drivetrain.
We also know that when cruising at 60 mph at 2600 rpm, a 3000 rpm converter will not be slipping noticibly more than when driving 70 mph at 3000 rpm. Converter slip and stall vary with load. That said some designs have less power loss under light load, and all converters have some loss even at high rpm - hence their limited use for road racing and the advent of lock up converters for better mpg.

I'm not saying converter has no effect on the enrichment point. A looser converter might let us get away with a less well tuned carb and ignition and at times that might include the PV point. But its not a given or direct relation that I can see. I suspect that those who have set up lean idle mixes with lots of initial timing will see lean issues in the off-idle lower rpm range that might be 'fixed' with early enrichment. Of course this comes at a cost of possibly washing down the cylinders with excess fuel when not needed....