Even though the above says load-balance per-packet, it is actually more of a load-balance per-flow since each TCP session will stick to one route rather than in

Even though the above says load-balance per-packet, it is actually more of a load-balance per-flow since each TCP session will stick to one route rather than individual packets going to different backend servers. As far as I can tell, the reasoning for this stems from legacy chipsets that did not support a per-flow packet distribution. Is this not fairly risky? It's essentially relying on a bug?