Europe's NATO members can gain an operational advantage by reframing close-combat training. However, with the current Combatives models, this change would add burden to both time-in-training and financial resources. Seizing this opportunity would require replacing the current technique/MMA-based models with a leaner model. To this end, alternative options offer increased functional expertise and substantial reductions in time and cost allocations.

To demonstrate this, we can use "time-in-training" to compare costs-and-time allotments against the achieved level of functional expertise.

The technique-based models:

For this comparison, the U.S. Army's current MMA-based Combatives training-model is a well-documented program. Here, 40-hours of training produces a "questionable" level-1 proficiency. An additional 80-hours produces a Level 2 proficiency. A combined total of 440-hours achieves the top level-4 proficiency. However, the average U.S. soldier only holds a level-1 or level-2 rating.

The statement of "questionable" proficiency is founded in the comparison of four scientific points;

1. Developing functional expertise: Functional expertise in MMA techniques require extensive repetition.

2500 to 3000 repetitions of technique are required to create the most basic mental-map (muscle-memory). This requirement increases with complexity. MMA techniques are complex. For example - Level 1 has a minimum of 8 phases, each with multiple individual techniques. Achieving basic functionality in any one phase equals 2500 times the number of techniques it contains.

1. Situational Awareness and Avoidance

2. Stress Management and Decision Making

3. Dominant Body Positions, range & range transitions, and body control, (a key principle)

4. Basic striking and defensive techniques

5. Grappling, throws, takedowns, clinch, chokes, and knee defense

6. Introductory rifle/knife based Combatives

7. Techniques for creating distance and disengaging from an opponent

8. Realistic Training and Application

2. Retention of functional expertise: Retention of functional expertise in complex techniques is low.

Retention of a complex movements (effective expertise) depends on repetitions and the time since last practiced. The factors listed below negatively affect retention.

1. How natural the movement is - Generally MMA techniques are not natural movements.

2. The complexity of the movement - Generally MMA techniques are complex.

3. The frequency between initial-training and recurrent training - MMA requires high frequencies.

3. The deterioration of fine movement under stress: MMA methods include fine-motor techniques.

High psychological/physiological stresses cause fine-motor deterioration. Deterioration begins at 145 heart-rate (BPM). The more complex a movement is, the more it deteriorates.

4. Somatic-markers: Somatic-markers determine access to mental-maps (techniques).

"Somatic-markers" store, sort, and select physical movement. Somatic-markers use rapid-sorting to determine selection. The most practised mental-maps are the quickest; lesser used maps are slower.

As counter-point, I am well versed in W.E. Fairbairn's "Gutter Fighting", so I will speak from that as an alternate option. In comparison with the MMA model, Gutter Fighting's battle-proven model achieves a higher-than-average functionality in less than 40- hours.

Completing the U.S.'s level-1 and 2 models will require 120-hours; completing the Gutter Fighting model will require 40-hours. 80-hours is a massive time/cost reduction. These savings will repeat every time the program is run. These are time/cost saving that can be reallocated to greater advantage elsewhere. Conversely, the MMA model repeats their double-rate-loss every time its program is run.

The Gutter Fighting Variant:

1. Developing functional expertise: Principle-based, Gutter Fighting is very natural.

Training installs a small toolbox of techniques that personally fit the user. This natural ease-of-execution accelerates efficiency,...