My Journey into UTD Ratio Deco

[Olariuas]

Sure. Saw that on Facebook.

When I will have the adequate training to understand deep decompression theory I will come back and read all those debates about ratio deco. They are really great but without proper basic understanding I cannot get all arguments everyone is supporting.

My buddy however wouldn't care a second to understand those debates and will clearly not take a positive position to support RD. It can be interesting to explain a bit better to bring those point of view to the level of a beginner but curious diver who really want to understand it. Or at least write a book or ebook can be cool.


I got a question however.

Whats the difference between GUE ratio-deco and UTD ratio deco 2.0 ? I do plan to make a GUE Fundies and goahead with few courses next year. And its so confusing that the best move would be totally ignore UTD RD to not bring confusion at all.

 

[Dan_P]

Sure. Saw that on Facebook.

When I will have the adequate training to understand deep decompression theory I will come back and read all those debates about ratio deco. They are really great but without proper basic understanding I cannot get all arguments everyone is supporting.

My buddy however wouldn't care a second to understand those debates and will clearly not take a positive position to support RD. It can be interesting to explain a bit better to bring those point of view to the level of a beginner but curious diver who really want to understand it. Or at least write a book or ebook can be cool.


I got a question however.

Whats the difference between GUE ratio-deco and UTD ratio deco 2.0 ? I do plan to make a GUE Fundies and goahead with few courses next year. And its so confusing that the best move would be totally ignore UTD RD to not bring confusion at all.

I'm sorry to hear that your buddy isn't interested in understanding the topic of discussion, but good on you for bothering!
I think the discussion is two-fold: one, about where the "optimal" balance between "deep" and "shallow" stops lie, and two, a discussion on the pro's/con's across using a computer and not using a computer.

I'm not fully confident answering your question about anyone else, but I believe the main difference is that GUE uses RD to mimic an algorithm, and use it only as a fall-back - conversely, UTD uses it as the primary mode and a "blueprint" for a strategy.

Ultimately, though, I think it's safe to say you'll in all likelyhood be very happy if pursuing training with either!

 

[Olariuas]

If you don't mind I would like to quote the beginning and ask only 1 question.

At first glance, Ratio Deco may look like “an algorithm”, “static formula” or “scientific formula” but it is NOT. It simply takes into account ALL of the competing decompression theories, plus the ongoing advances in decompression studies, a base profile and ultimately your personal complexities/experience, and incorporates it into your and your team’s strategy.

[...] don’t risk relying on a computer or decompression software, essentially conducting a “Trust Me Dive.”.

Ratio Deco ensures that when learning decompression procedures (or teaching decompression procedures), all of the historical decompression theories and applications are studied and understood, and all of the new ideas and theories are incorporated.

What's the point ?

If a 'thinking diver' have a strong background about decompression theories/studies/applications and are fully able to bring a personal adaptation based on his own experiences / feelings etc what's the point to have something who might bring up more confusions and specially when it directly mixing up all knowledges into a "strategy".

 

[Dan_P]

If you don't mind I would like to quote the beginning and ask only 1 question.

What's the point ?

If a 'thinking diver' have a strong background about decompression theories/studies/applications and are fully able to bring a personal adaptation based on his own experiences / feelings etc what's the point to have something who might bring up more confusions and specially when it directly mixing up all knowledges into a "strategy".

Sure thing.
I think it's important to differentiate across teaching decompression theory in the classroom, and deciding on a course of action for the dive - and then adapting that pre-made course of action in water.

For me, I find the "standard deco"-paradigm practical for a number of reasons, and I find that it's a good instrument for me to gauge my own comfort during dives.
I also think it's a good educational tool.

But I think it's on every diver to decide for themselves why they like the method/tool they're choosing.
There are a few available, and all of them have some pros and cons.

 

[victorzamora]

Whats the difference between GUE ratio-deco and UTD ratio deco 2.0 ?

GUE Ratio Deco is meant to be a way of approximating the established deco profile of your choice - Buhlmann GFs, VPM, etc. It's up to you.

UTD's Ratio Deco 2.0 is a specific way of calculating the deco obligation for a dive.

@Dan_P says RD2.0 is meant to function much the same as GUE's. Other than Dan, though, the multiple UTD instructors and students I've talked to regarding RD2.0 (and the history of UTD's RD) is very much linked to this being a specific calculation method.

 

[Olariuas]

I know this is just a FAQ focused on RD definitions and UTD' official position but some deep explanations (with graphs) where everyone should fall agree would be better.
I currently do not understand how a highly experienced technical diver would be convinced to adopt Ratio Deco as a strategy.
I do prefer to consider only algos/profilse that have truely benefits

Why consider ALL of the competing decompression theories/studies if some are more prefered than other ?

 

[Dan_P]

@Dan_P says RD2.0 is meant to function much the same as GUE's. Other than Dan, though, the multiple UTD instructors and students I've talked to regarding RD2.0 (and the history of UTD's RD) is very much linked to this being a specific calculation method.

I just want to be 100% clear that I'm not saying UTD and GUE use RD the same way - I don't know very much about how GUE use RD, and am not really comfortable making statements about it, for that reason - but while RD (in UTD) is a way to relate time/depth/gas to your way home, it is intended for divers to make adaptations as they develop.
A compass bearing as opposed to a GPS, if you will.

Why consider ALL of the competing decompression theories/studies if some are more prefered than other ?

I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone in the industry who will actually advocate not learning about multiple avenues of decompression theory.

Also, there are enough open questions that it wouldn't be right to say an aweful lot with ultimative certainty (though in fairness, on some points there are strong indications) - it's really important that divers, in their development, gain as much knowledge as they can to form an informed opinion and decision about their decompression.

Finally, I think it seems reasonable to work on the assumption that the "full picture", whatever it may be, probably includes some level of aspects from most avenues of the field.

I personally place a great deal of emphasis on being as candid as I can in classroom settings touching on the subject, and probably say "I don't know, but..." more than students expect (I'll then usually continue with a conversation about any studies I can think of, relating to whichever question might have popped up in the classroom).

I think it's important to emphasise that RD is a rule of thumb that will get you out of the water - and optimizing/adapting is on the diver. Every diver is different, and a lot of dives are different.

But, as I said, there are multiple ways to go about things, and each have their own pro´s and con´s.
I personally started out tech diving while "deep stops" were really popular across the industry, and used a computer at the time.
While the deep stop emphasis has generally changed, I personally prefer using a bottom timer.

Those are two different parametres, though - using RD vs. computer, and emphasising shallow vs. deep.

 

[Olariuas]

I just want to be 100% clear that I'm not saying UTD and GUE use RD the same way - I don't know very much about how GUE use RD, and am not really comfortable making statements about it, for that reason - but while RD (in UTD) is a way to relate time/depth/gas to your way home, it is intended for divers to make adaptations as they develop.

This is what I don't get and I don't want to be irrespecfull here.
You are a UTD instructor strongly promoting Ratio Deco 2.0 and following up UTD' positions / standards / procedures etc..

I can understand that you might not (and you are allowed to -nothing wrong here) know everything on everything on this Universe,
but would not be more usefull and bring more crediblility to know a bit more your subject about GUE RD (who is the main if not the top DIR agency here) when you request that your student must have an understanding as broad as varied on ALL the 'decompression' ?

Cause I just asked this simple question (GUE vs UTD RD viewpoint) and if you my instructor cannot help me to get an open-answer where I am supposed to go ?
How can you help me with that ?

All my buddies who are highly interested into DIR agency (some already started at least Fundies or IANTD Essentials / Intro2Tec etc etc) will goahead with GUE without to spend much time (or none) to deal with those RD debates. Of course it's interesting any debates bring more understanding (buddy vs solo, computer, sidemount, stop etc etc) but finally all my buddies will still continue to use and have a computer - will still to dive in sidemount eventually without to wait that finally someone decide to standardized that and without to be Cave2 or Tech2 level - will still continue to do solo diving but they will integrate every new subjects they learnt and bring custom or adaptation - according to them their buddy system highly highly improved etc.


Now I'm just a young diver my questions might not be that interesting after all.

 

[Dan_P]

Cause I just asked this simple question (GUE vs UTD RD viewpoint) and if you my instructor cannot help me to get an open-answer where I am supposed to go ?
How can you help me with that ?

The thing about it is there are too many conflicts in diving that shouldn't be there, particularly online - and I feel it's generally good form for me to try to focus more on how I do things, and let others explain how they do things.

I recently had an experience out here in Scandinavia with a "huge" online debate about using a specific brand of rebreather manually ("mCCR") instead of the original, out-of-the-box, electronic mode ("eCCR"), which became a really polarized debate with very little constructive take-away.
A few days later, one of the most vocal people in the debate, was dead (non-diving related) and it really drove a point across the board to everyone involved that the polarizing, non-constructive, conflictive debates are an utter and complete waste of lifetime.

For this reason, and others, I generally try to refrain from talking about the way others dive, and focus on talking about the way that I do.
Others, who are fully submerged (pun intended) in diving another way, can then explain why and how they do things.

When a diver/student has asked around with people who do things in different ways, they'll have what they need to form their own opinion. I think that's more valuable.

All that said, UTD "generally" uses RD as the primary mode, with your team as the backup.
As a standard, you can do that or use a computer with whichever algorithm you prefer (it's for the individual instructor/class to decide), but most opt for RD.

I've not done any GUE-courses and can't speak for any official position they may have on the matter, from what I gather, as a standard, they use computer as primary, and RD as backup.

Personally, I prefer using RD as primary with my team as my backup, for all my diving. That's a personal preference.

 

[huwporter]

I've not done any GUE-courses and can't speak for any official position they may have on the matter, from what I gather, as a standard, they use computer as primary, and RD as backup.

This is not correct.

And just to repeat yet again, the method for deriving your own ratios for decompression from the starting point of multiple profiles generated from conventional deco software that GUE teach also bears no resemblance to the handed-down rules of UTD Ratio Deco (TM).