My point is - and has always been - that no test inside the school is what I'd consider full verification of physical self-defense. The program you mentioned isn't physical self-defense (and can be executed on larger scale), so can be measured with real-world statistics. That's how it's done with corporate training (your comparison). Let's get something comparable to physical SD testing from the corporate world: policies regarding how to respond to bank robbery. There are some basic tenets that every bank follows. They seem to be effective at keeping people from getting hurt, limiting loss, and helping capture robbers. I say "seem to be", because there simply aren't many bank robberies to test them with. These are not ever going to be validated with the same kinds of statistics as the program you mentioned, nor the kinds of measurements that could be put around, for instance, training tellers to count money in a specific way to prevent cash errors. The same issue exists with physical self-defense training. If I have 100 students, chances are almost none of them will be in a physical altercation in a given year. Let's say 10 get in a "situation", and 8 de-escalate it, and 2 have to do something physical. That's too small a sample for any validity from a statistical perspective. I could pull apart what happened in each one if I have video (people's memories are simply to plastic to use for this), but each attack is so unique, I can't really draw any conclusions other than whether a specific technique that was used did or did not work in that isolated situation. The variables are too many to be able to draw many conclusions from either failure or success (skill and size of the attacker, element of surprise, fear/anger, ground, limited space, people nearby or not, skill and size of the defender, etc.). So, what do we do? We test in the school. I can't call it valid testing on the order one can do with training for competition, but it's the best anyone can really manage. We simulate attacks we, individually, wouldn't choose. We test against common (and some uncommon) attacks, with different levels of commitment and skill. We spar, to test against someone who knows what they're doing. But none of that can accurately replicate the situation of an actual attack in the street.