Combatives Instructors - Training

What is “Combatives” training?  What makes a good and effective Combatives Instructor?

You might get a different answer depending on the skills instructor you ask. Firearms instructors usually speak about guns while the arrest control instructors usually reference arrest control.  Don’t forget about the knife instructors and ground fighters. Yet the basic premise of all Combatives instruction is pretty simple and universal:

-           Identify the threat,

-          Neutralize the threat,

-          Control the threat.  

It does not really matter what tool you are using, the goal is the same. The physiological and psychological effects of combat stress surrounding all Combatives situations are the same whether you are using a firearm, open hand, or knife.

We, as instructors and agencies demand that the student-officers be well versed in all categories of Combatives. Yet there seems to be a clear separation between different Combatives cliques or sub-categories such as firearms, edged weapons, arrest-control and ground tactics. Why? The tactics and training clearly overlap and are mutually beneficial between these sub-categories.  I have long wondered at the dichotomy that seems to be in place in most agencies/organizations training programs.

On top of that, instructors who teach Combatives topics are different and must train differently than instructors in other more academically viewed areas such as community policing, report writing and so on. They (the sub-categories) need to be on the same page. The sub-areas are all under larger umbrella of use-of-force/combatives. These instructors also need continual development that is different than the typical “Train the Trainer” course that are more general and focus on the pre-frontal lobes of the brain.

A good Combatives instructor must understand the symbiotic relationship between the sub-categories and be able to tie their specific area to the others.  He/she must understand that Combatives instruction taps into different areas of the brain than non-combatives topics.  Both the prefrontal lobes and Limbic system need to be focused on and taught to. The instructor must utilize experiential learning as they are working with adult learners who must continually develop and often transfer what they learn to others. They need to use the H.A.T. philosophy which tells the student (and instructor) to Hone already in-place skills, Acquire new desirable skills, and Transfer that knowledge to others in the future. And finally, the instructor must have an in depth and evolving working understanding of the legal and tactical implications of Combatives training that do not apply to other non-force areas.

In short, Combatives instructors must realize that they are different than other instructors and that they must perpetually develop and evolve. They need to learn “how” to maximize knowledge transfer by directing instruction to both parts of the brain.  They also must quit being so cliquey and combine efforts with other sub-category Combatives instructors.  If your agency’s firearms instructors are not getting together with the arrest control guys and the knife guys, then they are cheating themselves as well as the students.  What are your thoughts?  How does it work (or not work) between the different skills areas at your agency?

"The test of a good teacher is not how many questions he can ask his pupils that they will answer readily, but how many questions he inspires them to ask him which he finds it hard to answer."