It's an unpopular opinion- but Op 10. No. 1 IS, in fact, a study in finger extension, precisely as Op 28, No. 19 and No 24 are studies in extension.
Remember, when Chopin was writing, the concept of 'economy of movement' of movement was the norm and ideal (epitomized in the Clementi 'coin on the back of the hand' thing, and the Kalkbrenner 'wrist bar').
In the 19th century, people were much tougher, and understood that musical technique was essentially a matter of physical conditioning. This was the time when the physicality of piano technique was deeply appreciated, i.e. practicing hard for 8 hours a day on weighted keyboard, as in Henselt, Liszt, Dreyshock, etc. Musicians then were like 'strongmen' and gymnasts. Although Chopin himself was physically small, he was very flexible. And he himself admitted that other people (like Liszt) could play his studies much better than himself.
IMO (take it or leave it) playing Op 10, No 1 with the ugly and inelegant 'twisting and turning' approach is simple cheating. It reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the exalted vision and purpose of the work, which is nothing less than the capacity of the 'self to conquer the self'. It is difficult- and it is supposed to be difficult, transcendentally so...For it is a work inviting the student to many years of deep self-transformation and self-overcoming, a kind of musical kenosis...