I talk a lot about training like an athlete. I hold fast in my belief that our training methodology is what holds us back from reaching our desired level of skill as efficiently as possible. People confuse events that 100% have value for conditioning or as tests with skill-building. They confuse how things are applied with how they are developed. Units train professionals who are devoted to their craft the same way they train neophytes who lack the desire to excel. Organizations overemphasize large exercises that serve as better tests of command and control than skill at the operational level.

So how should we construct our training? That can be a complex thing as you approach the higher levels of skill, but understanding WHY you are doing a training event is a good place to start. The more things you try and accomplish in any particular event, the less effective that event will be at producing any of the desired improvements. Sometimes things are combined because of lack of available training time. That can be valid, but remember it’s a compromise and is less productive as a result. The categories I think of when planning training are conditioning, skill building, testing, and the application of skill.

Conditioning is absolutely important. Success can hinge on fitness. Conditioning however is very different from developing skill. Mixing conditioning and skill training has value for testing skill. It is a recipe for blunting skill development though. If you always train a skill under tension and fatigue then your movement patterns become tense and imprecise. Just making training harder doesn’t necessarily make it more effective.

Training skill, in my opinion, is best done in isolation. Then once that skill is developed distractors and stressors can be added in. Performance definitely degrades under mental and physical stress. I believe that the best cure for that is a higher level of skill, and then exposure to those stresses as a test of that skill. When you are working on technique, work on that technique. Test it and learn to apply it later. Conditioning supports your skill. The mental game helps you apply it. But neither can make up for its lack.

Testing that skill you’ve developed absolutely has value. And at some stages in your training should be done pretty regularly. It informs your training, exposes weaknesses in need of improvement in future skill building sessions. It helps develop the mental component of performance as well. Testing can take different forms too. It doesn’t have to be a realistic scenario, although it certainly can be. It could also be a stress shoot in full kit or a sparring session.

The application of skill is the event our training is preparing us for. For a responsible citizen, it could be a self-defense scenario or one involving the defense of others. For an armed professional it’s going into harms way. Understanding the nature of what we are training for allows us to prioritize what we train the same way an athlete tailors their training for the needs of their sport.

Despite the often repeated cliche, “train like you fight,” conditioning, training, and testing aren’t the event. They prepare us for the event. Training like you fight doesn’t cut it. There’s no champion fighter who does nothing but spar. There’s no football team that does nothing but scrimmage. Instead of training like you fight, train like an athlete. Train for the fight.