What happened on this ILS approach?

And the examiner was OK with this?

Yes. But what made it OK was that I saw it coming and prepared for it.
I didn't just make it - I had it made. In fact, I was telling him the
vector was going to be bad as it was being set up, and that I was
slowing down so I could dive. There wasn't much explanation necessary
because he knew the score.

I could see them expecting you to declare a missed at that point.

And at the IR level, you would be right. At the ATP level, there's a
difference. You're expected to make things work - no matter what - and
do it without being surprised and without breaking a sweat. Bad
vectors are very much a part of life. At the ATP level, you're
expected to just take them in stride - not declare a miss, hose up the
sequencing, and get sent to the back of the line.

I'm not an ATP so this really is a question not a criticism.

I understand exactly where you're coming from. The obvious implication
is this - isn't this too much workload to take on? Doesn't adding this
kind of dive to a bad intercept make the outcome iffy? And I guess my
answer is - not for someone flying at the ATP skill level. It's just
not an issue.

I guess I'd be wondering on a checkride which course would be best to take.

I don't think so. Not if you trained for your ATP with an actual
practicing ATP. At least after flying a few hours with a Northwest
captain, I didn't have any doubts about the correct course of action in
that situation.

Michael