Comparing Doppler's class and GUE's DIRf class...
- Thread starter Vinnie
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Hello
When I participate in scuba cattle boat rides in Brockville or kingston, I usually see four or five seriously obese individuals diving and It's usually these same unfit divers who cause delays and get them selves into trouble once wrapped up in there extremely tight wet suits. These same people spend thousands of dollars on gear but fail at the most important feature of diving. Being physically fit. I'm glad to hear that at least one agency is taking a stand on this serious situation amongst divers.
DMI;-0
When I participate in scuba cattle boat rides in Brockville or kingston, I usually see four or five seriously obese individuals diving and It's usually these same unfit divers who cause delays and get them selves into trouble once wrapped up in there extremely tight wet suits. These same people spend thousands of dollars on gear but fail at the most important feature of diving. Being physically fit. I'm glad to hear that at least one agency is taking a stand on this serious situation amongst divers.
DMI;-0
pufferfish
Contributor
DMI I hear you but I can just read it now in the course prerequisites, "the student shall not smoke and shall have a body mass index less than thirty."
There is a ton of evidence that obesity at least morbid obesity (BMI > 30) probably carries at least the cardiovascular risk as does smoking a pack a day. Only problem is about thirty percent of North Americans have a BMI greater than 30. There was a poll here on SB looking at BMI and of the over one hundred respondents 25% had a BMI over 30. This is reflected on the boats we dive on. While I am all for fitness in divers the actual concept of overall fitness to dive should involve lot more than cardiovascular fitness. In my mind now there are three components to 'fitness'.
1. Psychological fitness
2. Cardiovascular fitness
3. Adrenal fitness (fitness of stress hormone axis)
As to the importance of each of these in recreational or technical diving I'd probably leave them in that order. In most diving we try not to exert ourselves and so the cardiovascular aspect would not seem that important. However it is under those emergency situations when that CVS reserve becomes necessary. I would contend though that if one is not an instructor where your odds of having to help someone out in an emergency situation are far greater and CVS fitness would be important then psychological fitness is actually more important. Concepts like the degree of anger and vital exhaustion are just as important in overall 'fitness' as is CVS fitness. Vital exhaustion seems to explain the fitness fanatic who drops dead of a heart attack all the while his CVS fitness may have been quite good. Often when the lifestyle the fitness fanatic was leading is examined more closely it can be revealed the excessive exercise went hand in hand with excessive work, poor diet, negative emotions (ie. anger) and a whole host of other factors which lead to the early demise. It is what goes on in one's mind that really plays on the cardiovascular and adrenal systems not so much the narrow concept of VO2 max. Cardiovascular fitness is but a small aspect of overall fitness.
As far as the individual diver the reason I think psychological fitness is more important than CVS fitness is that it is this fitness which keeps one out of trouble in the first place so one doesn't have to call upon the CVS system. Studies have shown that certain character traits are more likely to panic and that once panic begins dive experience is irrelevant. What dive experience does impart though is to raise the threshold where panic is likely to begin in a given situation.
So before we start saying one can't smoke or be obese in order to take a course it might be prudent to actually examine the entire concept of 'fitness'. I am not saying that excluding these folk cannot be or should not be done by an agency, but that these agencies might be fooling themselves into thinking the crowd they are attracting is more 'fit' in the true sense of fitness. Remember many applicants who apply for the police and military and who are 'fit' as a fiddle in their own minds (built like Arnold S and run like Ben J) are eventually rejected for not meeting the true holistic concept of fitness. If they are given a second chance they are told to work on their 'attitude' before coming back. Most never bother to return for a second go around.
divedude
Guest
Guess I'll never be a good diver I'm to fat to take a good course.
but as for causing delays on my "cattle boat" it's the divers with the so called "Tech Gear" that cause all the delays.
Col.Cluster
Guest
Barb,
I am not upset. I quite enjoy the banter. The problem with posts is people will read what they will into them. Outside of the usually suspects doing their usual character assassination routine, I thought this thread was quite positive. We got to compare a couple of training programs. I think that was a good thing.
Take care
CC
Col.Cluster
Guest
I would call comparing Dopplers new class to DIRF, A COMPARISON OF THE 2 CLASSES: Nothing more nothing less: Yes the thread was a thank you to those involved. It was also regarding a new and improved course. If this course is not up for discussion then it should not have been posted to a discussion board. Nobody came out swinging as you put it. I voiced my concerns and Doppler answered and posted his questions, which in turn I answered. Ripley and vinnie posted their questions and had them answered. This is called open discussion.
As far as being against Doppler, you also need to get your facts squared away. Tick and Mackay commended D for his efforts. SJ (another member of the team) warned Doppler away from a deep-air boat 2 or 3 months ago. And finally James Pate offered the use of his photographs in the presentation part of Dopplers new course. I call that a sharing of resources.
Doppler dude,
I had lunch with JP today. His offer still stands regarding the photos. If you have lost his cell number you can get from Tom at the shop or pm me. I also have his email address. JP is no long a member of this board for obvious reasons.
As far as being against Doppler, you also need to get your facts squared away. Tick and Mackay commended D for his efforts. SJ (another member of the team) warned Doppler away from a deep-air boat 2 or 3 months ago. And finally James Pate offered the use of his photographs in the presentation part of Dopplers new course. I call that a sharing of resources.
Doppler dude,
I had lunch with JP today. His offer still stands regarding the photos. If you have lost his cell number you can get from Tom at the shop or pm me. I also have his email address. JP is no long a member of this board for obvious reasons.
pufferfish once bubbled...
DMI I hear you but I can just read it now in the course prerequisites, "the student shall not smoke and shall have a body mass index less than thirty."
While I am all for fitness in divers the actual concept of overall fitness to dive should involve lot more than cardiovascular fitness. In my mind now there are three components to 'fitness'.
1. Psychological fitness
2. Cardiovascular fitness
3. Adrenal fitness (fitness of stress hormone axis)
and more and more....
Ah Puffer..Once again you take a simple topic and attempt to turn it into a Masters thesis. You do have some excellent points but lets dumb it down a bit for our readership.
The non-smoker rule is simple. Kevin pointed out the obvious about clogged up alvioli and bracials causing problems with gas transfer but the situation is a little be more severe than that. One (just one) of the evil by-products of smoking is carbon monoxide. It has a very strong affinity to bind with hemoglobin. And what is the function of hemoglobin? Well it is the transport mechanism that is the flat bed truck so to speak of the respritory system. If you smoke a pack a day up to 20% of your hemoglobin is bound to CO, which means that before you even get in the water you are accepting a 20% penalty for increased risk of DCS. Not only can it not transport O2 in it cannot transport inert gasses out. Now in all fairness the body is a wonderful thing and smokers actually produce more hemoglobin than non-smokers but the over all amount is not nearly what a healthy non-smoking individual has.
The requirement to be reasonably fit and not obsese is also a DCS consideration as fatty tissue is has very poor circulation and hence what inert gas gets in has a very difficult time getting out.
We do by the way have a mental fitness requirement and I believe the standard reads as follows:
1.6 General Prerequisites for All GUE Courses
The following are prerequisites for all GUE Courses (any additional and/or course specific course prerequisite, as well as any deviations from the following, will be listed under the appropriate section of the specific course):
1. Must submit a completed registration form, medical history, and liability release to GUE Headquarters.
2. Must be physically and mentally fit.
3. Must hold DAN Master level insurance or equivalent.
4. Must be a nonsmoker.
5. Must obtain a physicians prior written authorization for the use of prescription drugs, except for birth control, or for a prior medical condition that may pose a risk while diving. A partial list of
such conditions may be found on GUEs medical history form; if a student answers in the ...etc.
GUE is the only organization that specifically states the mental fitness requirement which gives me the lattitude to inform a student that is there for all the wrong reasons that chess might be a far safer alternative past-time for them to persue.
Good heavens I once had a student that was so petrifed that the student was incapable of doing anything. Once prodded I eventually discoverd that the only reason the student was there was to over come the students fear of water! Not on my watch! I invoked prerequisite 2.
These standards are meant to empower instructors and protect students. Unlike some other agencies, we do not believe that this sport is for everyone. Already there are at least three people in Ontario this year alone that I know shuffled off this mortal coil in "accidents" that a jusdicious application of decent standards might have prevented.
Safe dives,
Dan
JohnF
Guest
As a rec.scuba regular I'm used to legitimate GUE instructors asking the DIR suckups and wannabees to lighten up on the attitude. This wasn't always so, but has become more and more the case recently. I've met Dan MacKay and MHK in person and have found both to be enthusiastic and articulate about diving without making it an "us against them" routine. I've only traded emails with JJ but he too strikes me as a rational soul, not given to ranting and foolish discourse.
I've also met and dived with several instructors in the U.S. and Mexico for whose dive skills I have a world of respect and who, although they don't teach GUE and in fact refuse to describe themselves as DIR, state vehemently that the DIR protocols and precepts are the smart way to dive, and then prove every time they dive or teach that the label is irrelevent.
So, in answer to Dan's question about the animosity issue, there are divers (DIR and non-DIR) who aren't being rational about the whole discussion. Some of the pro-DIR types are too "my way or the highway" and some of the anti-DIR crowd do an irrational DIR sux knee jerk thing whenever a backplate and wing is mentioned.
The "holistic" idea seems to grate on some folks but I tend to agree with the DIR approach to things. If you take the time to hear and understand all the reasoning behind it, DIR makes absolute sense as a package. Some of the pieces work well by themselves, but I believe they work best as a full set, rather than piecemeal. If you absolutely disagree with something in the DIR set, and feel you have a better solution, by all means use it. Obviously in the context of your diving it makes sense. But don't cut off your nose to spite your face. Don't turn your back on a good procedure just because it's part of the DIR package. And don't presume that only DIR/GUE knows the best way to dive. The knowledge is out there. The smart folks will take advantage of it.
This has been said before but bears saying again, and again if necessary. What's DIR but a lot of diving common sense that's been known for a long time wrapped up in a nice package? Some folks delight in ignoring the fact that there are right and wrong ways to dive. Hopefully they understand that only a fool would teach the wrong ways just because the DIR label has been applied to most of the good ones.
I don't think Doppler is a fool, ergo ...
It's only logical that a conscientious trainer should use most if not all of the same principles in his/her training regimen as the "GUE" instructors use in theirs. A rose by any other name etc. etc.
Describing Doppler's course as a repackaging of DIR-F is not only an insult to Doppler and his efforts, but to GUE, Dan, MHK and the others who offer the GUE program. It suggests that DIR is simply one arbitrary notion of how to dive safely rather than being a compilation of rules and common sense derived from a wealth of experience and safety concerns recognized over years and years by some of the great names in diving. There is very little in the DIR collection of "rules" that can or will be rationally refuted by the vast majority of the best divers today. Some gas issues are still being debated but there seems to be a growing swing to the DIR philosophy. Only the reactionaries of the anti-DIR League will question the validity of DIR and that's more a response to the "holier than thou" attitude of some of the nasties of the DIR fraternity rather than to the shortcomings of the DIR/GUE program.
I think it's high time more credit was given to the folks historically responsible for packaging up this thing we know as DIR, but I also believe we need to commend folks like Doppler, and others like those I've encountered personally, who have the sense to incorporate these tried and true practices into their dive instruction programs.
It occurs to me as I finish this ramble that I've assumed Doppler's course content and methodology is along the same lines as DIR-F. I suppose this in itself is an indication of how I at least see the fundamentals of diving. Diver safety, trim, buoyancy skills, motive skills, gear selection & deployment, situational awareness, and so on, and so on ... all issues that should be important to every diver. Should all of these be considered by any responsible instructor? How many different ways can any of these things be taught properly?
Respectfully
JohnF
I've also met and dived with several instructors in the U.S. and Mexico for whose dive skills I have a world of respect and who, although they don't teach GUE and in fact refuse to describe themselves as DIR, state vehemently that the DIR protocols and precepts are the smart way to dive, and then prove every time they dive or teach that the label is irrelevent.
So, in answer to Dan's question about the animosity issue, there are divers (DIR and non-DIR) who aren't being rational about the whole discussion. Some of the pro-DIR types are too "my way or the highway" and some of the anti-DIR crowd do an irrational DIR sux knee jerk thing whenever a backplate and wing is mentioned.
The "holistic" idea seems to grate on some folks but I tend to agree with the DIR approach to things. If you take the time to hear and understand all the reasoning behind it, DIR makes absolute sense as a package. Some of the pieces work well by themselves, but I believe they work best as a full set, rather than piecemeal. If you absolutely disagree with something in the DIR set, and feel you have a better solution, by all means use it. Obviously in the context of your diving it makes sense. But don't cut off your nose to spite your face. Don't turn your back on a good procedure just because it's part of the DIR package. And don't presume that only DIR/GUE knows the best way to dive. The knowledge is out there. The smart folks will take advantage of it.
This has been said before but bears saying again, and again if necessary. What's DIR but a lot of diving common sense that's been known for a long time wrapped up in a nice package? Some folks delight in ignoring the fact that there are right and wrong ways to dive. Hopefully they understand that only a fool would teach the wrong ways just because the DIR label has been applied to most of the good ones.
I don't think Doppler is a fool, ergo ...
It's only logical that a conscientious trainer should use most if not all of the same principles in his/her training regimen as the "GUE" instructors use in theirs. A rose by any other name etc. etc.
Describing Doppler's course as a repackaging of DIR-F is not only an insult to Doppler and his efforts, but to GUE, Dan, MHK and the others who offer the GUE program. It suggests that DIR is simply one arbitrary notion of how to dive safely rather than being a compilation of rules and common sense derived from a wealth of experience and safety concerns recognized over years and years by some of the great names in diving. There is very little in the DIR collection of "rules" that can or will be rationally refuted by the vast majority of the best divers today. Some gas issues are still being debated but there seems to be a growing swing to the DIR philosophy. Only the reactionaries of the anti-DIR League will question the validity of DIR and that's more a response to the "holier than thou" attitude of some of the nasties of the DIR fraternity rather than to the shortcomings of the DIR/GUE program.
I think it's high time more credit was given to the folks historically responsible for packaging up this thing we know as DIR, but I also believe we need to commend folks like Doppler, and others like those I've encountered personally, who have the sense to incorporate these tried and true practices into their dive instruction programs.
It occurs to me as I finish this ramble that I've assumed Doppler's course content and methodology is along the same lines as DIR-F. I suppose this in itself is an indication of how I at least see the fundamentals of diving. Diver safety, trim, buoyancy skills, motive skills, gear selection & deployment, situational awareness, and so on, and so on ... all issues that should be important to every diver. Should all of these be considered by any responsible instructor? How many different ways can any of these things be taught properly?
Respectfully
JohnF
THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN POSTED IN THE NETDOC THREAD...SORRY
But I need to say something about mental fitness. It could be because of my spiritual conviction or something else, but an important responsibility of a "technical diver" is to show respect for and to share knowledge with others. At least I honestly believe that and attempt to get that truth across in my classes/
Anyhow, to share knowledge, you have to expose your ideas to scrutiny... and you have to be open minded and aware that there is only one constant in the universe...
I think a few of us need to think about this.
I've been teaching "technical diving" for ten years -- almost. I try to bring to it the same level of professionalism and the same attitude that I have learned in many more years as a businessman and communications consultant. Like many of you, I have to sit in meeting sometimes... with clients, with suppliers. I was waiting to go into a conference call this afternoon and I reread some of the posts in this thread. And I found myself wondering who the **** some of you think you are. You have displayed evidence of mental abbarations in your postings -- pride, elitism, bigotry, intolerance. And I tried to imagine these people in a business situation displaying that sort of behaviour...
Why does it surprise us that people shun the ideas they hold dear?
Just a thoughtut:
But I need to say something about mental fitness. It could be because of my spiritual conviction or something else, but an important responsibility of a "technical diver" is to show respect for and to share knowledge with others. At least I honestly believe that and attempt to get that truth across in my classes/
Anyhow, to share knowledge, you have to expose your ideas to scrutiny... and you have to be open minded and aware that there is only one constant in the universe...
I think a few of us need to think about this.
I've been teaching "technical diving" for ten years -- almost. I try to bring to it the same level of professionalism and the same attitude that I have learned in many more years as a businessman and communications consultant. Like many of you, I have to sit in meeting sometimes... with clients, with suppliers. I was waiting to go into a conference call this afternoon and I reread some of the posts in this thread. And I found myself wondering who the **** some of you think you are. You have displayed evidence of mental abbarations in your postings -- pride, elitism, bigotry, intolerance. And I tried to imagine these people in a business situation displaying that sort of behaviour...
Why does it surprise us that people shun the ideas they hold dear?
Just a thought
ut:Similar threads
