It's an interesting question and one I'm regularly asked after printer/paper reviews...
My simple answer is that it looks really good for -some- of my photos.
Matt paper/ink performance has definitely improved over the last few years, but I still find that personal preference and image content make a lot of the decisions for me. Some images just look flat and dull on matte paper and others look too harsh on lustre/gloss.
I'm lucky enough to have a pretty big collection of papers after all my reviews, but still come back to a few types and styles. However, given my iPF8300 was scrapped the other day, I'll have to look at this again some time ;-)
More importantly, I have a basic assumption that there is not any automatic "best" paper for an image. Indeed, once I find a good one I like for an image, the 'numbers' are essentially irrelevant (heresy to some I know ;-) )
Even my B&W, which I've tended to prefer on matte papers has images that simply look better (IMHO obviously) on lustre finish papers. In terms of commercial prints, I'll happily go along with the client's wishes (if they have any).
Epson UK are finally sending me a P5000 for an extended test (yay!) so as well as a detailed review, I'm looking to do a lot more exploration of making prints - The loss of my 8300 means I need to do some serious thinking about what the business needs.
(Oh, and HP - can we have a new big printer to stir things up. The 3200 was good when I tested it, but I'm simply not buying a printer I reviewed in 2009 ;-)