In this rejoinder, the authors respond to the insightful commentary of Strohmer and Arm, Chwalisz, and Hilton, Harris, and Rice about the meta-analysis on statistical versus clinical prediction techniques for mental health judgments. The authors address issues including the availability of statistical prediction techniques for real-life psychology applications, the development of these prediction techniques for future applications, and the training of counseling and other psychologists in using statistical prediction techniques. Many of these issues are couched in the historical debate about clinical versus statistical prediction.