Omar,
That was an extremely cogent take on it, IMO. It's why I was asking for further clarification and why I still claim it's possible that Dan and I agree entirely. I think it could very well be a case of arguing valid points past one another. Ive found through experience that working with various contact points (even "bad" ones) on purpose leads one to an appreciation for and understanding of them that is both experience-based and intuitive, rather than having to memorize an associated list of points for each and every choke, lock or throw, so I'm a huge fan of working material that way.
As an internal guy, and someone who has more than a passing interest in the actualities of real combat, I'm also a big fan of being able to work from any contact point whatsoever. The latter requires the same time spent to develop it to unconscious competence as working precise contact points does, so I'm by no means putting it forth as a shortcut. Anything one does takes time spent to do it in a skillful way.
Both skill sets are valid, and I have spent time developing them each in both myself and people I've trained. The take-home portion of my point is that if you want to survive real violent assaults outside of a training hall or sport ring, you damn well better have a healthy dose of the latter, and a recognition of the fact that, regardless of what/how you choose to train, you simply don't get the luxury of choosing or even unconsciously determining precise contact points in a real violent assault. Precision training is a case of overlearning toward a Platonic ideal, and is extremely valuable as such. As the saying goes, "Nice work if you can get it."