Since we are all in this forrum and not the more general forums I hope that my next statement will be understood. A buddy is a tool and not an emotional crutch to make it through our day. The term buddy in it self suggests that it is more than that. It has tones of "sig-0" or partner, ect . That may be the relationship when surfaces = dives, but when the dives outnumber the surfaces that body with you is a tool and not an object for bonding with, we have been taught from our beginnings to : dont go out at night alone, look both ways before you cross. safety in numbers. It is the kind of overprotectionalism that make mothers sleep well at night. It for the most part works well statistically when all dives are critiqued. Tthe flaw in the sample group is the group itself. it is not right to say that, in a groupe , the chances of a driving accident going to and from work is low when the 80 percent of the groupe works out of thier home. Equally is it not valid to say workplace acidents/incidents are higher than ever when you work at home and accidents include spilt coffee, the kids scraped knees. So is the same for diivng.
Perhaps if diving problems were catigorized by incident type and its buddy (tool) based involvement/resolotion was determined our numbers would be different. So lets for a minute toss out all uneventful dives from the sample groupe. Look at only dives where buddy intervention would be needed. My guess would be that the failure rate would be so high diving would be banned. In my beginning days, we dove in the workd of j-valves and horse collars. Successfull recovery from an OOG due to having your buddy tool with you was very high. or at least perhaps the failure rate of successfull resolution without a buddy was high. I dont think it ranks so high in this day and age. I say this because we have different toolsets. In this case j-valves replaces with k valves and gages, horse collars relaced with bcd's, second air sources.,smb's,, the list go's on and on to the point that the buddy has no/little single source Functional safety value as a buddy based survival TOOL. Because of that, the buddy takes on a whole new purpose. Almost all of it has nothing to do with survival as much as increasing the divng experience (bonding,,,, makes me feel warm allover). (speaking from the bow and aow aspects). I think diving solo with others makes for a more enjoyable dive.
We all have heard stories of the buddy saving the day, and the buddy is the first one the finger is pointed to when things go south. I have not seen the hero buddy myself as much as i have seem problems escolate from the failing buddy. Yet we certify people as bow's and just assume the buddy portion of the new diver is just as qualified as the diver portion The combining of Agency placed limitations that exclude diving in situations that have little tolllerance for buddy failure, and instilling survival fear in each new diver that contemplates diving without said buddy, produces paronoid compliance and results in a relative incident free stats. face it when you get your new shiney bow card,, it is saying that you are profiecient in conducting a basic (minimal/no hazzaed) dive without KILLING YOURSELF, not that you are a buddy. No mention of a buddy in that level of certification. (as seen by the cert recipient) If that were not true then gui and the likes would not be teaching FUNCTIONAL buddy and team skills/concepts. Any diver that goes out with a nonfunctional set of tools is an anchor to ones self and others. Because I blelieve that , I believe that I DIVE SOLO WITH OTHERS. The SOLO arena has limitations, and through individual risk assessment those limitations are taken in consideration in the limits of the planned dive. That individual thought process is not only alien to the bow, it is one of many aspects that distinct us from the more fundimental divers. I would also submit that the time comes when, those with higher aspirations move on to more buddy/team based diving groups such as the more technical groups have done before us.
