I really feel you've got it backwards. I passed the VCP4 and I felt the whole thing was a memory exercise in the form of a configuration maximums PDF.
VCP5 really did improve things.
I've passed the MCSE/MCITP and CCNP in the past - no vendor, in my experience, ever produces an exam you can pass with just "real world" experience.
There's a form of study involved in every certification, whether it's spending weeks on Federated Services (Microsoft) because noone ever used them in the real world, extensively studying Frame Relay (Cisco) because it doesn't exist in this country, or going off and learning all about VMware's new Storage Appliance of vCenter appliance, neither of which I've felt a need to use in the many real world deployments - there's always study needed. What this means is that, no, you can't make a hugely accurate determination of a person's real world capabilities based on an exam.
I certainly agree on the point of the mandatory classroom training. I can't imagine actually needing to attend a class with the word "Installation" in its name and coming out with a significant qualification because of it. The cost of said course is so high, it's hard not to feel like it's a bought qualification - getting people qualified is certainly a hard business case.