My Journey into UTD Ratio Deco

[Olariuas]

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.

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.

Sure but you can not ignore that GUE agency / training are more popular than UTD agency. I do apologize.
Some will not even mention UTD or ISE but more eventually TDI or IANTD with instructor who do teach DIR-style / or highly experienced instructor.
Majority will recommand only GUE. At least this is what I can read -- with others who will agree too
People will recommand Shearwater as the best computer even if you have other end-game computer
People will recommand DAN as the best insurance even if you have others ...
blahblah

So you do suggest that a student who want to build his own point of view about Ratio-Deco - must do both GUE and UTD training ?
I kinda appreciate that OP is doing this for us with a free-open forum who allow such debates/argues/conflicts such fights.
and I kinda appreciate more than my instructor will have something to answer correctly if a question is asked inside his class
I would understand that there are a lot of knowledge to gather but ..

Currently this is so confusing as UTD position is to request students to have a great and decent background to understand All decompression theory
and according to you - you have no clue exactly how the GUE Ratio-Deco are close or far or comparable to UTD Ratio-Deco.
This is your personal point of view and I might assume this is the same with other UTD instructor, right ?
but this is fine as long as (maybe) GUE instructors do not know UTD RD as well.

Who opt for Ratio-Deco (without a proper training by GUE or UTD agency) instead of current trustable algorithms already used by thousand of divers for years ?
and who already have multiples scientifc papers on it ?

Where are the current UTD students / divers who might come and had their point of views on this debate ?

I think I will goahead with my buddies point of view too -- let's not care of this debate.
There are so much confusions. If other people do reply -- yes this is a waste of time then I won't waste my time.
even if I am still interested to read and understand what's going on inside those 28 pages

 

[victorzamora]

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

Dan, I really poorly phrased that previous quote. In rereading it, I realized that I was not very clear.

What I meant to say was that you're the only voice I know of stating that UTD's RD2.0 is taught as a "starting point" that people are intended to change to their liking. You've stated that you can add time if you were cold or if you were working, or simply want additional time on Oxygen. This is not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is changing the ratios, stop distribution, s-curve shaping, etc.

UTD's RD2.0 isn't meant to be aggressively customized. It's not meant to match Buhlmann or VPM or RGBM or any other model. It's self-contained.

 

[Dan_P]

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).

I'm happy to be corrected on how GUE do things in regards RD - as I said, I'm really not the right ressource for a comprehensive explanation on what GUE S&Ps look like on the matter.

However, as for the UTD side of things, I don't mind an elaboration (below).

Dan, I really poorly phrased that previous quote. In rereading it, I realized that I was not very clear.

What I meant to say was that you're the only voice I know of stating that UTD's RD2.0 is taught as a "starting point" that people are intended to change to their liking. You've stated that you can add time if you were cold or if you were working, or simply want additional time on Oxygen. This is not what I'm referring to. What I'm referring to is changing the ratios, stop distribution, s-curve shaping, etc.

UTD's RD2.0 isn't meant to be aggressively customized. It's not meant to match Buhlmann or VPM or RGBM or any other model. It's self-contained.

Fair game, that clarifies it for me.

I don't agree that the positions expressed in regards RD adaptations reflect UTDs position on Ratio Deco, at all - but, as me saying what I feel about the matter will have very little leverage, I will refer instead to two sources to cement UTDs position on the matter:

This aforementioned FAQ is sanctioned by UTD HQ as official UTD policy, and states that RD is indeed intended for adaptation. However, as it's like 3 days old, in fairness, I'd like to refer to something a bit older, from 2012 and every subsequent version;

UTD Diver and Student Procedures, version 2.1, page 195:

"The following discussion of Ratio Deco strategy is a starting point, with a set of guidelines that are based on UTD / DIR standard mixes, deep stops, oxygen windows, free phase gases and dissolved gases. Initially, you will want to take a small step away from relying on a computer-generated profile and/or wrist-mounted computer, and practice using a very conservative Ratio Deco strategy..."

and, particularly:

"...we encourage you to start by using the set of Ratio Deco rules and strategy as outlined below, allowing you to both gain the experience and confidence in your deco schedules prior to deviating and developing your own set of rules or tweaks."

I think UTDs position is perfectly clear.

I'll paraphrase to illustrate how I interpret the above:

Ratio Deco is intended as a starting point from where divers should adapt as they develop and/or their diving becomes increasingly specialized.

 

[victorzamora]

UTD Diver and Student Procedures, version 2.1, page 195:

"The following discussion of Ratio Deco strategy is a starting point, with a set of guidelines that are based on UTD / DIR standard mixes, deep stops, oxygen windows, free phase gases and dissolved gases. Initially, you will want to take a small step away from relying on a computer-generated profile and/or wrist-mounted computer, and practice using a very conservative Ratio Deco strategy..."

and, particularly:

"...we encourage you to start by using the set of Ratio Deco rules and strategy as outlined below, allowing you to both gain the experience and confidence in your deco schedules prior to deviating and developing your own set of rules or tweaks."

I think UTDs position is perfectly clear.

I'll paraphrase to illustrate how I interpret the above:

Ratio Deco is intended as a starting point from where divers should adapt as they develop and/or their diving becomes increasingly specialized.

I agree, that's what that sounds like to me as well. However, that's the de jure answer....as in: That is what the rules state.

My issue is that the de facto position is one of exactly following the prescribed stops. When many instructors say that UTD's RD needs to be followed because that's what is taught and spread by many of its advocates.

Even fully following the phrasing in the UTD manual that it's meant to be tweaked, it is still not based on any other algorithm. GUE RD's starting point is based on a Buhlmann GF.

 

[Dan_P]

I agree, that's what that sounds like to me as well. However, that's the de jure answer....as in: That is what the rules state.

My issue is that the de facto position is one of exactly following the prescribed stops. When many instructors say that UTD's RD needs to be followed because that's what is taught and spread by many of its advocates.

Hmm... Well, actually, point taken.

I mean, I don't really recognize it from my own sphere, but the world is of course bigger than that, and if you say that most of the UTD-instructors you've met who use RD, radiated the position that you describe, then I'll believe you.

All I'll say I know for certain is what I've got from "the book", my training, conversations with AG, UTD HQ-hosted global online meetings with the instructor core, and my own little world. All of those are aligned in that RD is very adaptive in terms of deep stop emphasis (in the manner you described).

But I think it's an interesting perspective to the conversation. Organizations always risk a disconnect, especially with growth and I think we've seen interesting cases of this in the world of scuba, as well as elsewhere.
Something to think about, and keep in mind, I think.

 

[mikeny9]

Olariuas == Sebastian right? Hi You might remember our conversations over FB.

Sure but you can not ignore that GUE agency / training are more popular than UTD agency. I do apologize.

A majority of states in the US recommended Trump but look where that got us. Just because an option is the popular one doesn't mean the option is the right choice for everyone. PADI and SSI are the most popular diving agencies. By the same logic, shouldn't we all be learning how to dive from them? Shearwater is dope though!

Currently this is so confusing as UTD position is to request students to have a great and decent background to understand All decompression theory...

This isn't necessary by any means. Decompression theory is taught in each course. The depth of knowledge taught depends on the level of the course.

Who opt for Ratio-Deco (without a proper training by GUE or UTD agency) instead of current trustable algorithms already used by thousand of divers for years ?

I would hope no one is performing any form of ratio deco without proper training in such methods.

Where are the current UTD students / divers who might come and had their point of views on this debate ?

Gone diving... [probably with RD 2.0]

My issue is that the de facto position is one of exactly following the prescribed stops. When many instructors say that UTD's RD needs to be followed because that's what is taught and spread by many of its advocates.

A student is free to follow whatever decompression strategy their heart desires. RD 2.0 is taught but not enforced except while performing the dives required to complete the course. This is the same as most other agencies. If someone was taught UTD RD 2.0, but wants to use Buhlmann GFs, as long as the team agrees on the same ascent profile there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Even fully following the phrasing in the UTD manual that it's meant to be tweaked, it is still not based on any other algorithm. GUE RD's starting point is based on a Buhlmann GF.

Well, sure it's not based on algorithms per say, it's based on dissolved gas models and bubble models. The same models which were used to create algorithms, such as ZHL-16C (Buhlmann-based dissolved gas model) and VPM-B (Yount-based bubble model).

 

[Olariuas]

Olariuas == Sebastian right? Hi You might remember our conversations over FB.

Umm none of my close and buddies are called Sebastian. And I don't call myself Sebastian... Sorry.

Yesterday I tried to read this thread and I got headach... This is a too serious debate and I don't have deep knowledges yet in decomporession theories to understand what you guys are arguing about. Probably in few years if a book / ebook will be out and everyone or at least more detailed and comprehensive I will have a look.

 

[CAPTAIN SINBAD]

Just to give everyone an update ... UTD tech-1 has been a very humbling experience so far. I am only half way through it but it has shown me a lot of areas in which I need improvement. When it comes to the in-water skills there is enormous emphasis on detail and precision in technique so I am putting a lot of practice sessions learning things that I always thought I knew already.

More to come.

 

[mikeny9]

Hang in there, keep practicing

 

[Alexandros]

Hi, would you mind sharing with us what was your previous (decompression) training? Thanks