Just something from my perspective --

Word choice often reveals our thinking (as words represent ideas). And one thing I see over and over again is the constant references to "knowledge" or "understanding" as though this has some significance. To me, this indicates that the speaker is viewing WCK as a system of knowledge (theory).

Helio Gracie "knows" more and "understands" more about BJJ than probably (at least arguably) any living person. He certainly "knows" more and "understands" more (in his pinky finger) than a tough, young purple belt. But if they *really* fought, the young purple would destroy Helio. Now certainly Helio is great for his age (90) and could probably beat anyone in the world in that age group or even somewhat younger (80s, maybe 70s). He might even be able to handle a young, tough scrub (with no skills). But his ability to perform, i.e., his skill level, has decreased with age (he was once a world-class fighter) even though his knowledge/understanding has continued to grow. The purple even with much less knowledge and understanding can out-perform the more knowledgeable Helio. In other words, the purple has more skill/abilty. And this same example, just by changing names, can apply to any fighting method.

This example shows that skill/ability is not commensurate with knowledge/understanding. Folks with much less knowledge/understanding can often out-perform those with greater knowledge/understanding, even knowledge/understanding not based on theory but from first-hand experience. In other words, it's not what you know/understand, it's what you can do -- performance -- that determines your skill level. The goal of our training, therefore, should not be seeking knowledge or understanding but in increasing performance (increasing skill). The knowledge and understanding is a by-product of the skill/ability (it comes from the performance) not the precursor.