A couple of points here. I believe that the wider spacing between Stronglight's rings made for a more sharply-angled chain during shifts, i.e. the front derailer cage moved further than did Campag's (or anyone elses on most non-strnglight chainsets). So the greater angling of the chain may be what helped the chain to snag the teeth better.

I think that the wear pattern on front or rear sprocket teeth has to do with one's chain-replacement intervals relative to whatever chain stretch (wear) limit that the owner subscribes to. Replacing the chain at 1/2 of 1% "stretch" as is recommended today (instead of at the former 1%) does concentrate wear nearer to the base of the teeth, so gives more of a reverse-hooked shape. While this is problematic in terms of a new chain perhaps failing to engage due to contact with the hooked corners of the driven side of the teeth, the new chain also is closer in pitch to the old chain so it takes perhaps three chain lives worth of wear to have any rumbling or skipping develop, at which time the three used chains can be rotated into service all over again. But the manufacturers don't recommend extending the sprocket's service lives out that far and there are surely at least a few reasons why (including lateral flex developing and reducing shifting performance, and the liability implications of fatiguing of the parts)

I have ground off the corner at the hooks on both chainrings and cogs, thus eliminating both rumbling and skipping respectively (Illustrated below on a single tooth of a mildly-worn cassette cog).
Bevel should be tiny, less than a mm, and at a 30-40-degree angle to the driven edge of the tooth is most effective for the least amount of material removed.