Solo vs. Buddy perspective

[Thalassamania]

I would rather dive with someone who says he won't share his air but has skills to save his own ass than with someone who will share but dives like an idiot.

I would not dive with either one, perhaps they could buddy up?

 

[redrover]

So the gist of what I’m getting for answers is…?

· Solo diving has various connotations, each diver working out individually their basis for a dive being a Solo. A common distinction involves no pre-arranged agreement between 2 divers. But even in the absence of a pre-arraigned agreement, should the need arise it is expected to be unnecessary.
· As for a Buddy Dive, being a pre-arranged agreement; with the buddy not willing to provide a universally accepted resource, most view one as useless liability and not akin to two divers, each diving solo side by side.
· There aren’t many options for a diver unwilling to share air but dive Solo and keep a good distance from other divers.

 

[TomP]

So the gist of what I’m getting for answers is…?

· There aren’t many options for a diver unwilling to share air but dive Solo and keep a good distance from other divers.

Not to say that you are suggesting this but an unwillingness to share air hardly qualifies one to safely dive solo.

 

[Alex777]

I would not dive with either one, perhaps they could buddy up?

 

[Dive-aholic]

I always dive self-sufficient, usually with a buddy. A buddy is, to me, someone who is always close enough and skilled enough to intervene on my behalf in an emergency, on rare occasions I only have students, or I'm diving with my 11 year old son and so I don't have a buddy in the sense I define it. On those occasions I'm much more careful.

So what I'm reading is you dive differently with someone who can intervene v. someone who can't intervene. Why should it make a difference? My diving and my attitude are the same no matter who I'm diving with. I dive with my wife on a regular basis, but I also dive with students and with fairly new divers. My attitude is the same no matter what. What do you do when you're with someone who can intervene on your behalf v. someone who can't?

 

[all4scuba05]

I would not dive with either one, perhaps they could buddy up?

Quite a few times I've heard people here on Scubaboard say that they simply would rather not dive. Well I'm not that person. I would rather dive and try to enjoy it. So far so good.

Not all of us have a siamese twin that follows my nondiving wife and I when we go away on vacation. I therefore have found myself being buddied up with idiots on a dive boats. And no, I don't always have a choice as to which diver on the boat needs a buddy. Most of my dives are in New England waters. However, I take atleast 2 vacations a year and always get a few dives in during those vacations.

Point is that if I find myself having a choice, then I'll be choosing the lesser of two evils. That being the guy who knows how to dive but won't share air, over the one willing to share his air but most likely will need to breathe mine. Not all captains allow solo diving off their boats.

 

[Thalassamania]

So what I'm reading is you dive differently with someone who can intervene v. someone who can't intervene. Why should it make a difference? My diving and my attitude are the same no matter who I'm diving with. I dive with my wife on a regular basis, but I also dive with students and with fairly new divers. My attitude is the same no matter what. What do you do when you're with someone who can intervene on your behalf v. someone who can't?

My normal teaching mode is two buddy pairs of students and my buddy is my AI. I'm all set. On occasion I will not have an AI, just one pair of students. I dive differently, usually that means carrying a pony in addition to my usual stuff. If I'm taking a new diver out on a checkout vs a team member that I trained and with whom I dive regularly ... again different approach, different site, shallow, and I prefer to do that as part of a pair of buddy teams or a trio. Same if I'm diving with my 11 year old ... best as part of a team of two buddy pairs or a trio. What it gets down to is thinking not only about your own abilities and limitations but the abilities and limitations of the diving team that you are part of. If I were insta-buddied I'd similarly want to dive as part of a larger team that has some members that I know are competent, but then I take seriously my commitment to provide assistance to any buddy who requires it.

 

[TomP]

Quite a few times I've heard people here on Scubaboard say that they simply would rather not dive. Well I'm not that person. I would rather dive and try to enjoy it. So far so good.

Not all of us have a siamese twin that follows my nondiving wife and I when we go away on vacation. I therefore have found myself being buddied up with idiots on a dive boats. And no, I don't always have a choice as to which diver on the boat needs a buddy. Most of my dives are in New England waters. However, I take atleast 2 vacations a year and always get a few dives in during those vacations.

Point is that if I find myself having a choice, then I'll be choosing the lesser of two evils. That being the guy who knows how to dive but won't share air, over the one willing to share his air but most likely will need to breathe mine. Not all captains allow solo diving off their boats.

We've all had to deal with operator enforced instabuddies at one time or another and that's been a subject for a whole set of discussions. The operators objective is to limit their liability by fostering adherence to generally accepted best practices of safe diving and/or the rules specified by their affiliated agency.

The case at hand, a diver publicly asserting an unwillingness to adhere to those practices, would present a bit of a quandary for the operator because he would open the door to the liability he's is attempting to avoid.

 

[603doug]

On a working trip to Fort Lauderdale I had time to get a couple of dives in. Went out on a charter and was buddied up with someone who had no business being in the water. He had no clue on buddy breathing or what to do if there was a problem (I dive with quads and paraplegics so I am use to people who could not always pail me out if there is a problem, you just do your best to cover all bases.) Told the divemaster he better watch the guy that I did not want the responsibility or I would abort the dive and would want to be reimburses. He said he understood and I went about my dive. He took the young man in a shallow area so he could also get a dive in. On returning to the boat for next dive the young man decided with the help of the divemaster he would stay on the boat.

 

[Dive-aholic]

My normal teaching mode is two buddy pairs of students and my buddy is my AI. I'm all set. On occasion I will not have an AI, just one pair of students. I dive differently, usually that means carrying a pony in addition to my usual stuff. If I'm taking a new diver out on a checkout vs a team member that I trained and with whom I dive regularly ... again different approach, different site, shallow, and I prefer to do that as part of a pair of buddy teams or a trio. Same if I'm diving with my 11 year old ... best as part of a team of two buddy pairs or a trio. What it gets down to is thinking not only about your own abilities and limitations but the abilities and limitations of the diving team that you are part of. If I were insta-buddied I'd similarly want to dive as part of a larger team that has some members that I know are competent, but then I take seriously my commitment to provide assistance to any buddy who requires it.

But when you don't have someone diving that you know is competent, what do you do? I'm not trying to be difficult, but I'm still not getting the difference. Are you less aware or less safe if you do have a competent diver in the water with you v. having a competent diver in the water?