If this is what you're referring to, we're quibbling about terminology.
this is what i was afraid of - on of the big pitfalls about talking about dance - i just reacted your response to opendoors statement that he was working with chicho on dissociating his lead from his footwork by doing exercises like leading 3 steps while walking 2 steps, and it seemed to imply that you thought that vidort would not do that (i.e. having his own footwork dissociated from the followers footwork - which is really one of the fundamental (and unique) techniques of tango - everytime we switch from the between crossed and parallel system one of us did 2 steps and the other one did 1) ). So you would agree that we can be in synchronized if we don't step at the same time, as an extreme example assume i step on the 1 and , and then (really slow) i step on the 1 again, while i lead my follower to just run ahead ...12341234 (to do that i probably would have to do crossed ochos or something, this is just for the sake of clarifying concepts/language)? (or the other way round - i lead them to be on the strong beat in the milonga and just do different stuff with my own footwork around their steady walk)?
So a couple is synchronized if the follower follows the lead independent of what the footwork might be (as long as the footwork is 100% lead)?
If we agree on this then i don't see what i was saying before to be very different - i just think that the footwork does not need to be 100% lead if the result is the same in the end. A pretty theoretical example would be the follower arriving at exactly the same point, at exactly the same spot as lead, just using different footwork - e.g. i lead 1 step, and they do 3 steps during that time and arrive at exactly the same spot, on the same foot. I consider us to be still in synch - and because it is a theoretical example i did not even notice it, to me there was no perceivable difference.
Now of course this is a ridiculous example - i don't think this is physically possible (well, there are some people who have really fast feet, so it might be possible). In reality there is something that is kinda close to that - the follower "does stuff" like slowing down, or extending or compressing a step, or curving tighter, or whatever (including, if the conditions are just right, switching systems and adding steps), that does not break the geometry of the couple and its relationship with the music and still keeps the couple in synch.
Thank you for the request to retire. Joke aside, you can argue like this, but you cannot invoke Ricardo Vidort at the same time. Vidort is the Bruce Lee of tango, the one who put an end to styles (although the origins of his own dancing are quite obvious). He invited his students to develop their own style as long as it was centered in feeling and musicality. Ironically, just Vidort is the authority for my insisting in the separation of style and technique (technique in a wider sense). All milonguero saints and stylites (Cacho Dante, Tete Rusconi, Omar Vega) had a strong foundation in dance technique. (Think you remember that Tete collaborated with Pina Bausch).
. It is the same problem i have when trying to talk about counterbalanced close embrace / apilado / sharing weight - the concrete reality of dancing is subtle and basically invisible, and not really that well communicable outside of personal experience. All we can do is to give extreme examples that hopefully communicate at least something (though to be honest when talking about sharing weight the response of "the lean is always an illusion" is for me easier to deal with than "like a gavito performance?"). 
