Come to think of it, my complaints aren't that the 109s or 190s are under represented, but rather some historical oppositions are over-represented such as the P-47s or P-51s, Typhoons, P-38s and etc.. These things are ridiculously stable as a fighter.
True, some of them like the P-38 or the P-51 has horrid spins when it is pushed too far over the envelope, but really, with all that flaps flogging around who in the world stalls out those planes anyway? At least those planes can be pushed so hard until a simple stall develops into a dangerous spin.
The 109s? They just flutter, shake, and destabilize at the roll axis like someone going into a seizure, the moment it reaches over the envelope. It refuses any kind of further inputs and requires the pilot to just stop everything they are doing at the moment. Stop turning, stop pulling, just level out, stay still until fully stabilized, and then do something, which by that time the enemy plane has already turned 1/2 of a circle and is closing behind your rear.
I fly a P-47 or a P-51, enter a high-yoyo, feel the plane stalling out, then I can kick a bit of rudder, lower a notch of flap, and correct my plane position easily enough to 'shift' the stalling momentum downwards to the descending part of the yoyo. Pretty easy.
I do that in a 109, the plane feels a stall, it starts wobbling on the roll axis. I have to go neutral stick, neutral rudder, do nothing and wait for a moment until the plane fully stabilizes, before attempting anything. A pilot even slight tries to maintain the stick pressure, kick more rudder, correct the wobbling momentum, etc etc.. and bam! The plane stalls out. Gee, it's no wonder the 109s never go into fatal spins like the P-38s or P-51s - they can't be pushed up to that point in the first place.
Provided I'm in an equal situation with an equal amount of E advantage over - let's say - an La-7, I actually have a better chance to outmaneuver La-7s in P-47s or P-51s (planes I almost never fly), than any kind of Bf109 (been flying for over five years). I see a low La-7 in a P-51 or a P-47, I jump down. The enemy turns, I lower flaps, kick rudder, go into a E-killing maneuver and a series of rolls and scissors and bam, I land behind the La-7. However, in a 109, the same situation, I see a low La-7, jump him, he turns, I go into a yo-yo, and then we go around and around and around and around, until I deprive the La-7 of every last drop of E he's got left - and only then, can I land behind him - which by that time someone else steals the kill I worked my prettythang off, or some other enemy fighter blows me out of the sky.
After the series of turn radius tests I've got no beef with the pure turning radius of these planes. My beef is the stability. Some planes are just way too stable. The P-38 is understandable, since it hasn't got any torque. But I am doubtful if the P-51 was such a decisively superiorly forgiving plane under such low-speed stall fighting conditions. Nor such a heavy and large P-47 can go flopping around so stably, dragging that fat belly across the horizon rolling and swinging its tail about into such series of wingovers to outamaneuver such planes.
