As Hornetstinger implies, CRT phosphor persistence is significantly higher than 1ms. The formulation of the phosphor must give a decent tail-off in luminance otherwise you'll be subjecting the user to an unacceptable level of flicker and eventually eye-strain at the refresh rates a CRT typically runs (generally sub 120Hz).
Side by side, the old E400 and this LG (strobed) give a similar feel.
Yes, analogue CRT definitely has an edge; it just feels that bit more connected and "alive" (the hint of flicker). However, add in phosphor persistence, lower refresh (the E400 will only do 75-77Hz at 1600x1200) and all the caveats of CRT technology, and modern LCD doesn't really feel like second best at all.
Do a side by side test, dragging a white mouse pointer on a black background in the middle of the screen and the LG has less visible crystal persistence than the phosphor of the CRT.
What the LG does have is a second, single faint ghost of the pointer which is quite noticeable when near the bottom of the screen, but almost invisible near the middle.
And, of course a degree of processing lag and crystal transition lag (mitigated by strobing), though unless you're hopping from one technology to the other, you generally won't notice any difference. I certainly don't anyway.
All of the above in relation to LCD hangs on the strobing however. Switch that off and the LCD experience is much less impressive. I do feel I'd have been disappointed with any high refresh LCD without strobing given how the LG performs with it disabled.
