Nothing requires the "if" or "when" wording per se. The question comes to whether or not you want to allow players to interact during the resolution of the effect. For example, in the case of
Heart-Piercer Manticore, you don't choose targets for the ability until you decide whether or not to sacrifice a creature. It's two triggers hidden in one ability. In the case of
Throwing Knife, the ability will kill
Gossamer Phantasm even if you don't sacrifice the knife. In the case of the
Heart-Piercer Manticore, you need to sac a creature of your own before you can target
Gossamer Phantasm, so you need to be committed before you do things.
Same thing applies to "will they or won't they" situations? If your 2-toughness
Gutless Ghoul is targeted by the
Throwing Knife, then you have to choose whether or not to sacrifice
Gutless Ghoul to its own ability before your opponent has to decide whether or not to sac the
Throwing Knife, which means after you sac for the life, they can just not sac the knife, and if you don't sac for life, then they can kill you without you gaining life. In the same situation with
Heart-Piercer Manticore, they have to sac a creature before you need to choose whether or not to sac the
Gutless Ghoul to its own ability.
Wizards seems to have shifted gears and gone mostly with the intervening "when" wording on most cards, since it's a bit easier for newer players to understand and plan around, but in practise, there may come times where the intent of the card's abilities is such that an intervening-if clause will be more appropriate.