Are we diving or swimming?

[Lake Hickory Scuba]

For the record in PDIC, SEI, and CMAS, there is no option except for 300 yards with no swimming aids. Giving the student has no handicap that would deem otherwise, such as no legs. In that case, other options are available as long as you contact the training agency and explain the reason for not being able to meet standards, then it is up to the agency on whether or not the student earns the certification .

 

[TMHeimer]

Also, while I would agree swimming is a useful skill for a diver to have in case something goes wrong, discussions on SB often note that there are a number of skills that would be useful for a diver to have in case something goes wrong but which are not widely taught in OW class. To play devil's advocate, I would ask why swimming is a required OW class skill but other skills that similarly would be useful only if something were to go wrong are omitted? Is that because there is no time left to teach those skills in the hurried atmosphere of most OW classes today, but the assumption is that students can teach themselves to swim?

I think I somewhat agree with you. Can you give some examples of other useful skills that could be added? Perhaps be accomplished at snorkeling? I do agree that weekend courses pack a lot into two pool days and of course the OW course isn't what I read that it was decades ago. I don't think however it is unreasonable to assume that anyone taking a scuba class knows how to swim. I do find it amazing that this is TRUE. Swim tests shouldn't even have to be there in a sane, logical world.

 

[Bob DBF]

Thanks Bob. I was unaware of the 1980 requirements. I like the idea of proper strokes. Don't really think those requirements were over the top, though I would be satisfied to see someone do considerably less than 200 yards (even just a lap or 2) with a proper stroke.-- Instead of just gutting it out any old way. So yes, I do share your concern regarding the present requirements it that you can dog paddle your way to the 200 yards--and thus you are "comfortable in water". I also don't like the "choice" of 200 or 300 m/f/s. Should be one test for all with accompanying reasoning--no "choosing" by instructors or voting by students. Besides, the 300 m/f/s for me anyway is WAY easier and has nothing to do with real no-fin swimming.

I think the big reason for two different strokes was insuring you had a way to avoid cramping, and the 200 yards was for perspective, sometimes a problem is not resolved quickly. Gutting it out is what you may have to do, and with a good instructor pointing the issues involved, changes the diver's perspective and gives more tools to use when planning a dive. The objective of a dive is not to "see the pretty fishes", but to get back safely when returning from the dive so you can "see the pretty fishes" again later.

Since diving is in the water, one should have passable water skills, an understanding of how important those skills could be, and a good knowledge of their own limitations in the water. I believe it is a large oversite to minimize or gloss this over this in dive training.



Bob
-----------------
I may be old, but I'm not dead yet.

 

[Lake Hickory Scuba]

Another reason no one has mentioned, the swim test is a good tool to use to see if the students can exert energy without over exerting themselves, as we sometimes do under water. Just another reason the swim test has value for later applications. I haven't found a reason that the swim test is unreasonable or inappropriate.

 

[TMHeimer]

Another reason no one has mentioned, the swim test is a good tool to use to see if the students can exert energy without over exerting themselves, as we sometimes do under water. Just another reason the swim test has value for later applications. I haven't found a reason that the swim test is unreasonable or inappropriate.

Makes sense. Never thought of that.

 

[rongoodman]

When all is said and done, there's no way I would exchange my back kick for a pretty freestyle swim stroke.

 

[tomfcrist]

When all is said and done, there's no way I would exchange my back kick for a pretty freestyle swim stroke.

Nobody would ask you to have a "pretty" swim stroke...merely one that will keep you from drowning. Id also like to audit the OW course that teaches and/or requires student proficiency in the "Back Kick". Hell I have seen more than a few Tech divers that cant do a backdown...like not even close to a backdown.

 

[Lorenzoid]

Another reason no one has mentioned, the swim test is a good tool to use to see if the students can exert energy without over exerting themselves, as we sometimes do under water. Just another reason the swim test has value for later applications. I haven't found a reason that the swim test is unreasonable or inappropriate.

Is that different from the idea that a prospective diver should have some level of physical fitness, as mentioned earlier in the thread?

 

[Lake Hickory Scuba]

One could interpret as such.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I really can't believe that anyone would question the value of being able to swim if you are even going to be around water. I've been part of a rescue and a recovery of kids in swimming pools whose parents allowed them to be there. They did not know how to swim yet mom and dad allowed them to be there. In one case the parents were several hundred yards away at a BBQ. I consider parents who allow their kids to get in a pool without knowing how to swim to be guilty of abuse of that child.