His speed estimates are wrong, as he should have tested gzipping many small files instead of gzipping one large file. There is a significant difference.
Why? If you're setting up your website right, you should be serving 1 HTML file + 1 JS file + 1 CSS file + 1 image for each request, and the latter 3 should all be cached indefinitely. (At least for static chrome - if you've got thumbnails, videos, or flash games you can't exactly sprite those.) His test file was 146K, which seems on the high side for HTML only, but I'd imagine serving 1 small file is faster than serving 1 large file.
1 image for each request? Are you putting all the images for each page into one image file, then cropping the needed region for each image on your page?