Yeah, like I said I've always just done it. But leave me alone with nothing to do and I start thinking about random stuff! So here we are!! LOL!!That's a good question. I believe that the reason is if any potentially catastrophic latent stresses are imparted during quench, getting into temper may relieve those latent stresses before time and/or circumstance allows those stresses to manifest in cracks or deformations. In other words, I think it's just best practice to minimize potential by shortening the window of opportunity for disaster.
Another reason is retained austenite. Tempering, or in the case of stainless steels, cryo treatment, can convert retained austenite to untempered martensite. This brings the reason for 2 cycles of tempering, to temper the untempered martensite converted in the first tempering cycle. The longer the time between quenching and tempering or cryo, the less retained austenite will be converted.
Going off Larrin Thomas' articles on cryo for stainless steel, I believe he said even a wait time of 15 minutes could make a difference. You want to have a continuous cooling of the blade from quench to cryo. From my understanding, the longer retained austenite is at a steady temperature before the process that converts it to untempered martensite, the less will be converted.Is the retained austenite conversion time between quench & temper a function on minutes, hours, or days?