I've done it a few times so they didn't pull their cages over or get into someone else's cage in my crowded areas. As long as you have some sucker growth lower in the plant, it really doesn't make a difference other than keeping them from being top-heavy. When I have topped them, usually I'll remove most of the leaves from the lower branches so the suckers get enough light - again this is in cages so on a trellis I'm not sure if you'd have to or not.

I hadn't even considered top-heaviness. Good point! Best to encourage growth anywhere but the top of the trellis.

I think you might get less production overall, but I don't think it makes as drastic a difference with cherries as it does with larger fruited types. Sometimes, it's worth it for the manageability, especially if you're swimming in cherries anyway.

Yes, that makes sense. But the issue was the effect of shade on productivity. Overlapping layers of cherry tomato vines don't get a lot of sunlight. So more vine = more tomatoes is not an obvious conclusion. It is true however, I believe, that cherries are more tolerant of shade than full-sized tomatoes.

Either topping or letting them ramble will hurt production if your trellis simulates my high tunnel stringline. The better management is to lower and coil the main stem allowing the tip to continue to grow upward and produce unobstructed. Thus the reason why a plant pruned to a single stem for much of the season will eventually surpass production of the rambling unpruned plant.

Lowering and coiling the main stem is highly impractical for me now, as seven feet of the main stems have already been tied up to the trellis. That's an interesting strategy, however. In practice, I guess one could guide the main stem up the trellis in a winding path as it grows. I have plants about a foot apart, though, so there isn't a lot of room to do that. But if you had a sparser collection of plants, that would make a lot of sense.