no, I think it's mostly genetic. I mean maybe if you're in high school you could tell people it makes weed better, but that would be wrong. There is reasoning to use it as a visual cue as a grower and such and it can be an identifier at the budtender level to indicate a quality of a strain/product/grower/consistency etc. But it's not in my opinion (at least ethically) about it is better per se to the high or taste. I mean you can read them to tell some proper grown bud for sure. But that won't indicate effects. It could look perfect and be bunk. I think for me It tends to let me compare genetics to others growing the same strains to see how close it is to the mainstream accepted variant. but lots of buds look the same at face value. pistils like most the material don't really add anything to the high since it's in the THC and that's in the.. well thc and resin glands.

So they can tell you a lot about a plant but nothing about the high for the shortened version.

Good buds for me personally tend to have constant new pistil growth overgrowth that you can see was happening non-stop til harvested. You get those big dense crystally buds. vs some really fluffy stuff.

edit: typos and the fact autocorrect made it "pistols" and not "pistils".

I'm noticing my Colombian has pistils covered with trichomes. Not so much with the indicas.

The plants I grew had full red Pistils but just the beginning of Ambers..
Some of those Budz really pop with Red