Lecoq understood that his training in performance could enhance his understanding of how other performers might learn. I would have to agree. 20 years of sports practice is inevitably reflected in my design/research work – whether I choose to embody/use it or not. This is probably why I will always do both – because the two are inextricably linked for me in a way that will always make me see things a bit differently. Designers bring different styles and approaches to the table – that’s important because different performances require different things, different teams work with different skill sets and designers certainly don’t need to have training in both areas. However, it certainly explains why I was never quite comfortable with the interactions between performers and designers – who used a shared, yet contradictory language that could aid collaboration yet also create numerous problems. On the one hand this knowledge helped, on another it became quite difficult. I understood training and performing as someone who did both – but had no appropriate structure through which to apply this knowledge within a design process. My research has been a journey in understanding, developing and working through a structure that explored, investigated and made visible this language. On a basic level, in sport, movement simply has to be understood better – performance development is the goal. Training in sport meant I looked at things in a different way – I saw movement first or at least at the same time as the clothes that were worn. That interested me.