Here is a comparison between the current TAS and if the bug was used.
All time stamps are from VBA v19-23, so there might be 1 or 2 frames difference to bizhawk. (VBA input is delayed)
Timing is from first frame of a room where input is accepted, until first frame of the next room where input is accepted. That way, score calculation is taken into consideration.
Room Time(OldTAS) Time(withBug) TimeSaved Notes
01 443 (624-1067) - 0 Can't do bug
02 621 (1067-1688) 594 (1067-1661) 27
03 631 (1688-2319) 594 (1688-2282) 37
04 636 (2319-2955) 594 (2319-2913) 42
05 608 (2955-3563) - 0 Can't do bug
06 +1Up 550 (3563-4113) - 0 Can't do bug
07 642 (4113-4755) 593 (4113-4706) 49
08 686 (4755-5441) 593 (4755-5348) 94 Not verified. predicting 593 is possible.
09 757 (5441-6198) 593 (5441-6034) 164 Not verified. predicting 593 is possible.
10 617 (6198-6815) 593 (6198-6791) 24 Not verified. predicting 593 is possible.
11 733 (6815-7548) - 0 Can't do bug
12 +1Up 844 (7548-8392) - 0 Can't do bug
13 649 (8392-9041) 594 (8392-8986) 55
14 533 (9041-9574) - 0 Can't do bug
21 +1Up 581 (9574-10155) - 0 Can't do bug
22 610 (10155-10765) 594 (10155-10749) 16 Not verified. Predicting 594 is possible.
23 639 (10765-11404) - 0 Can't do bug
24 +1Up 759 (11404-12163) - 0 Can't do bug
25 761 (12163-12924) 594 (12163-12757) 167 Not verified. Predicting 594 is possible.
26 575 (12924-13499) - 0 Doesn't save time (575 is faster than 594)
27 639 (13499-14138) - 0 Can't do bug
32 +1Up 529 (14138-14667) - 0 Can't do bug
33 733 (14667-15400) 593 (14667-15260) 140 Not verified. Predicting 593 is possible.
34 610 (15400-16010) 593 (15400-15993) 17 Not verified. Predicting 593 is possible.
35 511 (16010-16521) - 0 Timed until score changes. Can't do bug
LCD lag is not considered since this testing was done on old VBA. I tested on newer VBA and the LCD lag is 35 frames there. In other words, the transition lag that took 1 frame on old VBA takes 35 frames on new VBA. Doing the bug causes LCD lag to happen one additional time, so 34 frames have to be added to the TimeSaved potential. When the bug doesn't save at least 35 frames, there is no use doing it.
Room Time(OldTAS) Time(withBug) TimeSaved
03 631 (1688-2319) 594 (1688-2282) 3
04 636 (2319-2955) 594 (2319-2913) 8
07 642 (4113-4755) 593 (4113-4706) 15
08 686 (4755-5441) 593 (4755-5348) 60
09 757 (5441-6198) 593 (5441-6034) 130
13 649 (8392-9041) 594 (8392-8986) 21
25 761 (12163-12924) 594 (12163-12757) 133
33 733 (14667-15400) 593 (14667-15260) 106
00:13.93 sec saved (when sticking with VBA19~23)
00:07.97 sec saved (when switching from VBA19~23 to VBA24m → added LCD lag)
Bizhawk actually seems to have 37 LCD lag frames. So we subtract another 2 frames:
Room Time(OldTAS) Time(withBug) TimeSaved
03 631 (1688-2319) 594 (1688-2282) 1
04 636 (2319-2955) 594 (2319-2913) 6
07 642 (4113-4755) 593 (4113-4706) 13
08 686 (4755-5441) 593 (4755-5348) 58
09 757 (5441-6198) 593 (5441-6034) 128
13 649 (8392-9041) 594 (8392-8986) 19
25 761 (12163-12924) 594 (12163-12757) 131
33 733 (14667-15400) 593 (14667-15260) 104
00:07.70 sec saved (when switching from VBA19~23 to Bizhawk → added LCD lag)
Finally, we take into consideration the life management:
Room Lives
Start of game Have 5 lives
03 (Bug) Have 4 lives
04 (Bug) Have 3 lives
06 (+1up) Have 4 lives
07 (Bug) Have 3 lives
08 (Bug) Have 2 lives
09 (Bug) Have 1 life
12 (+1up) Have 2 lives
13 (Bug) Have 1 life
21 (+1up) Have 2 lives
24 (+1up) Have 3 lives
25 (Bug) Have 2 lives
33 (Bug) Have 1 life
So it should be all good. No continues are needed. One continue would have taken 33 frames in old VBA, and probably 107 or so on Bizhawk.
A new TAS should be 04:33.37 or better.
EDIT: Actually, I forgot that LCD lag is added in places that aren't improved, too. So the new time will probably be much higher than the current time...