085 - Building Readiness, Not Just Fitness: What It Means to Train Tactical
The tactical field demands more than peak fitness; it demands readiness. A soldier doesn’t get to warm up before a firefight. A firefighter doesn’t get to recover mid-call. And a law enforcement officer doesn’t operate in ideal conditions. This chapter lays out the foundation of tactical strength and conditioning, clarifying what separates tactical athletes from sport athletes and outlining the professional role of the Tactical Strength and Conditioning Facilitator (TSAC-F). It answers a critical question: how do we train for the unpredictable?
What the Chapter Covers
This chapter introduces the TSAC-F certification, the NSCA's answer to the need for population-specific training in tactical environments. It outlines the core differences between tactical and sport athletes—unpredictability, mission-critical outcomes, gear load, and operational stress—and stresses the importance of job analysis for designing effective programs.
Key content includes:
Occupational specificity: Training must match the demands of the job (e.g., breaching doors, carrying heavy gear, pursuing suspects).
Movement analysis: TSAC-Fs must break down real-world actions (e.g., scaling walls, dragging casualties) into biomechanical demands.
Energy system use: Tactical tasks draw from all three energy systems; programming must reflect this variability.
Injury/illness analysis: Tactical athletes face unique risks (e.g., cardiac events in firefighters), demanding prehabilitation, monitoring, and role-specific interventions.
Scope of practice: TSAC-Fs must work as part of an interdisciplinary team and know when to refer.
Assessment and program design: TSAC-Fs oversee testing and long-term periodization, adjusting based on unpredictable shifts, deployments, or emergencies.
What This Means:
This isn’t fitness for aesthetics or a performance peak; it’s resilience under fire. Training tactical athletes means designing for volatility. Coaches and clinicians need to let go of rigid sport-based models and embrace occupational analysis, fatigue-informed planning, and mission-relevant outcomes. Too often, tactical programming mimics athletic training cycles without accounting for job realities, leading to poor transfer and increased risk. This chapter reframes that: the job is the sport, and the outcome is survival.
Tactical Implications:
Anchor programming to job tasks: Always start with occupational analysis; what movements, loads, and energy demands are mission-critical?
Shift your performance metric: Don’t chase PRs; chase reduced injury rates, improved response capacity, and sustained readiness.
Integrate recovery as a strategy: Adjust daily loads to reflect operational stress (e.g., post-callout downshifts).
Screen for return-to-duty, not just return-to-play: Tactical readiness must factor in psychological load, asymmetries, and task-specific reintegration.
Train for chaos, not comfort: Build physical and cognitive resilience in unstable, gear-loaded, unpredictable environments.
Questions To Consider:
Are your current assessments truly job-specific, or are they just convenient gym tests?
When was the last time your programming adapted to mission demands, not just periodization theory?
Do you understand the real injury risks of your population, or are you guessing based on athletic norms?
How are you tracking readiness, not just fitness?
Who do you collaborate with (medical, command, behavioral health) and how does that shape your training decisions?
Dawes JJ, Lockie RG. Tactical strength and conditioning: an overview. In: Alvar BA, Sell K, Deuster PA, eds. NSCA’s Essentials of Tactical Strength and Conditioning. Human Kinetics; 2017:3-23