[azmanam]

Which do you prefer?  Why? 

I don't care for asymmetric.  'Asymmetric' is just too broad of a term to have any meaning.  You can say what you mean - and say it more accurately and precisely - by using 'enantioselective' or 'diastereoselective' or whatever.

Some would argue the term refers to the transition state, but again, why not use the more accurate and precise term and leave ambiguity out of it?

I see we've brought this up before, but I thought I'd rehash it as it was on my mind tonight.

http://www.chemicalforums.com/index.php?topic=166

[Tutoring]

I agree totally. You also get the case where things are pseudo-asymmetric and not ‘truly chiral’.  For example when the ‘pseudo-asymmetric’ centre is connected to 2 completely similar other chiral centres that differ in chiral center assignment (R and S), but the enantiomers are still non-superimposable and still rotate the plane of polarised light in opposite directions

Asymmetric could really be any type of centre, not necessarily chiral, or even an atomic centre, it doesn’t really tell you that you’re dealing with a chiral molecule.