One time or even annual training is of little benefit if there is no routine development of the material taught. Conversely, if someone receives one time training but spends hours weekly developing that material you could have tremendous growth. The focus should be on the mid to long term training methods that support and develop the tactics, not only the tactics themselves. I have also seen numerous training programs that do not approach the subject of violence in a violent way. The training is sometimes very watered down as to insure that there will be no injuries during the training. Injuries should not be the normal outcome of regular training but should be an accepted and managed risk. There must be realistic, high probability tactics and progressive resistance. In certain cases I’ve seen training met with disdain and even arrogance.

Some professionals do not like to train athletically because it puts them in a vulnerable position within the power structure. They might not be able to stop a real ground attack and that might not look good. It might even make them feel bad. The point is that you must know where you are weak and develop that area. Even when they do drop the ego and participate it’s a one time or once a year thing. That is not going to make it. There must be ongoing development. There are other professionals who actually pay for training out of their own pocket. They do not feel that the watered down, far to few training sessions they get on the job will be enough. Some are even fanatical about it. Others do not have a realistic idea of what real combat is like. They think the training they get is fine. The problem is that they have no reference point. Even though they are in law enforcement they have never trained at a high level, have never had a real fight or have never been attacked by someone who wanted to do them serious harm. Another important reality is that many in law enforcement are far to secure (unrealistically so) in the fact that they carry weapons. Again, the weapons are operator dependent and training and ongoing development is crucial. There is no real difference in the athletics for training with weapons and unarmed tactics. There must be a focus on safety, handling, marksmanship, tactics and fighting. There must also be progressive resistance. When I speak of those in law enforcement I speak in broad generalities about standards, polices and practices. There are numerous individuals and departments who stand out in a good way. It just seems that the lowest common denominator is also the most prevalent. This is not to condem but to provoke thought. I am very sympathetic to the realities of working in law enforcement but many in law enforcement are not sympathetic to the realities of good ongoing training. In some instances money is a big problem but I am referring to the individual and his desire to develop his combat applications.

The Mixed Martial Arts community is a great example of training for a real fight. The level of understanding of how to integrate striking, clinch and ground has progressed to an elite level over the past decade and a half. The advent of ground fighting forced the strikers to get better. The skill of the strikers forced to the clinch to develop. Now the playing field has been leveled. Everyone strikes, clinches and grapples. It is also trained in a realistic manner with good tactics and progressive resistance. Development of the delivery system is the normal result of training MMA. The focus on athletics is so important to the reality of fighting. But, is it a fight we should be training for? Where MMA falls short is on the application of it’s methodologies to an assault scenario. This is where one participant attacks another who does not know an assault is about to happen or where multiple opponents are involved. If your reference point is one guy coming at you from across the ring you could be in for an unpleasant surprise. Likewise, if you train for an altercation that always starts with someone postured in front of you it’s hard to call this self defense.Pre fight threat indicators, deceptive dialog, de-escalation and threat recognition must be included to develop the MMA delivery system to its highest potential. Again, development is needed to bring the training in line with expected outcomes. There are other factors that can hinder development outside of bad tactics, bad training methods and lack of training frequency. Age, disability, injury and ego are development killers. The first three are not by choice. The last is.

The point here is that in order to be at an optimal level to respond to violence you must be trained and developed. Far too many individuals have told me about their one time training in such and such that happened X number of years ago or how they trained with so and so over the years. It is painfully obvious to see who has spent time developing the methodologies they've been taught. Development can happen with a couple of buddies in the garage, gym, on the gun range or in a structured class setting. No matter what your approach is there is almost always room for development as long as you are willing to recognize it.