On Wednesday, February 05, 2003 12:01 PM, Reef Fish wrote:

> >Mate!  You haven't convinced me that your views are superior to mine - or
> >that the ability to swim 200-metres without fins is a "useless" test.

> Not trying to convince anybody that the view is "superior".  Just a
> matter of "independent thought" that for SCUBA, especially OW-I, why
> would anyone ever want to do anything without fins?

Mate!  I've done SCUBA with lead weighted boots! (I know that's outside the
realm of this discussion, but I'm enjoying the mind-stretching exercise!)
:-)))))

> The the discussion got side tracked (which I didn't object) into
> bringing into play what was required of DMs, intructors, etc. because
> some non-self-reliant BUZO needed immediate rescue, etc.

OK! I give in.  What's the meaning of BUZO?  :-)

> So, my point is simply that, again, for SCUBA purposes, I never need
> to do so WITHOUT fins, so why bother to test anyone on such?

Because diving rescues - regardless of whether the incident happens at
depth - invariably involve being on the surface of the water??? :-)

> With in mind, on with the show.  :-)))

> I
> >also take exception to your suggestion that I am following a "party
line",
> >(which "party line" would that be?<BG>) given that my views on the
> >practicality of water confidence and swim tests happen to coincide with
> >those of all of the training agencies that I hold/held training
> >qualifications with, and were arrived at through bitter firsthand
> >experience! :-))

> ANY party line for which you qualify as an instructor.  :-)  Otherwise,
> you wouldn't have brought into play anything like swimming 800 meters
> WITHOUT fins.  :-)  That's certainly not a god-given distance for
> ANYTHING (without some "party line" giving that "polluted thought"!)
> That's just the starter.

You're right - and you're wrong!  Imagine testing a person for every
conceivable distance and situation that they might be required to swim -
with or without fins?  It seems to me that a person who can only manage,
say, 100-metres in a surface swim without fins - before collapsing in a
chatty, exhausted heap - would be less competent  than a person capable of
swimming 200-metres with fins and then performing a rescue.   :-)

> Independent thinking suffers.   Then the business about snorkeling
> 800 meters without arms!

Independent thinking doesn't suffer at all.  And, as I've already stated,
snorkeling without the use of arms is far more efficient than trying the
same distance with arms in terms of conserved energy resources.  (At least,
that's how it works for me!  And I'd be most interested in hearing that
anybody else thinks differently!)  :-)

> As a simple soul,

You bastard! <VBBWG> That's what I say when I'm about to give somebody a
verbal whack around the side of the head!  :-)

>my question was simply ... I wouldn't mind doing
> ANY distance (be it 100 meters, 200 meters, 800 meters, 1600 meters,
> 5 kilometers ...) and I would do it without breathing hard, WITH FINS,
> and you wouldn't hear a beep from me (not even from my computer <G>).

That's good for you!  Personally, I'd have died of boredom after the first
three kilometres! (I also did, today, 60 push-ups, straight-up, without
breaking a sweat.  But it has no relevance to the fact that the reason I'm
doing it is to beat the shit out of the thieves from Asian Diver Magazine
during the next ADEX Show!)  But could you do that distance in adverse
conditions and knowing that your purpose was to render help to others?
People who might well be in the final stages of panic and not interested in
your own personal interest in survival? :-)

> But as soon as this nonsense how about swimming without fins and
> snorkeling without arms start, that nonsense got to have come from
> SOMEBODY's "party line".

Why? :-)

> I couldn't POSSIBLY have come from the
> mind of Strike, which I believe to be much more intelligent and
> sensible than THAT,

Mate!  I can positively assure you that you didn't come from my mind and
that you're a real and caring person whose well worth the knowing!
:-)))))))

>if given the completely FREE HAND of designing
> ANY test suitable for a Open Water SCUBA diver.

Throw 'em in and see if they sink or float is my motto!  :-)

> >To my way of thinking, required training skills are only "useless" when
> they
> >offer no practical benefit.  Water confidence skills and swimming tests
do
> >offer such benefits.  Especially to those who have responsibility for
> people
> >under training. :-)

> See the above paragraphs.   :-)))

Did that! :-)

> >If I were to make a criticism of ALL of the various training agency
> courses
> >then it would be that none of them, (that I am familiar with), drum the
> >taught skills into a person until they become second-nature, (and that's
a
> >fault that rests more with the individual who, having been taught a basic
> >skill, seldom spends time enhancing and practicing it to the point where
> it
> >does become second nature.) :-)

> See my above paragraphs.  Beating the WRONG drum until silly, as far
> as SCUBA skill and confidence is concerned.  One ALWAYS scuba dives
> WITH FINS, and for good reasons too.  ;-)

Ah!  Now one doesn't always SCUBA dive with fins!  I've SCUBA dived using O2
rebreathers; mixed gas rebreathers and air systems wearing boots - and
without fins! :-)  (And it has - occasionally - qualified as recreational
diving!)  :-)

> >Even in that regard, as Lee has pointed out, people - regardless of how
> well
> >trained - do sometimes forget that training.  This holds particularly
true
> >where rescues are concerned.  In part, because there are so many
variables
> >to quickly consider and assess, and  no amount of training can prepare a
> >person for every conceivable rescue scenario.  A cry for help, for
> example,
> >from somebody that one knows or loves, will trigger a different response
> >than if that cry came from a stranger.  (And often trigger a re-action
> >rather than the more suitable action!) :-)

> That gets very TANGENTIAL into the question of whether BASIC scuba
> training should take the fins away from the scuba diver!

Of course not!  Finning is an integral part of scuba diving and its
enjoyment.  :-)

> Let's get back to fundamental BASICS.

> >Taken by and large, you've still not managed to convince me that ...

> Not trying to convince you into anything (in so far as any particular
> requirement is concerned), only to THINK a bit more how many times
> a scuba diver gets into TROUBLE because they lack buoyancy skills,
> lack well-controlled ascend-descend skills ... all WITH FINS.

In my experience buoyancy skills - or lack thereof (alongside any other
skills that you care to mention) - are not the reason that a diver gets into
trouble!  :-)

> That's where TRAINING should concentrate on, rather than swimming
> WITHOUT FINS.  I dare say 999 out of 1000 of scuba accidents and
> fatalities were NOT caused by any scuba diver who lost his fins and
> could swim to safety!  It's caused by them WITH fins, but didn't
> know what to handle various SCUBA conditions and tasks ...

True!  :-)

But how many scenarios would you like to nominate and describe as being an
essential training ingredient?  :-)

> More often than not, scuba divers get the ERRONEOUS impression that
> because they are hot-shot swimmers who can do 800 meters in 9 minutes
> that there's nothing in SCUBA skills that they can't handle.

I've never, ever come across anyone who claims that their swimming ability
should be a mark of how good a diver they are!  :-)

> That's VERY real -- the FALSE security, at least in part grown out of
> the silly TESTS given, requiring swim without fins!

If people never came to the surface of the water, I might be inclined to
give that view some consideration!  :-)

> >> the single MOST USELESS requirement of being able to
> >> swim 200 meters/yards, and treading water for X minutes, WITHOUT fins.
> >
> >... is irrelevant in SCUBA diver training!  :-)))

> Indeed.  They why give those as TESTS to calibrate the competency of
> scuba diver, and rate them on some 1 to 3 or 1 to 5 scale, depending
> how a scuba diver can do those SILLY tricks?

So what "tricks" would you deem appropriate?  :-)

Seriously!  I've thrown this up a few times over the years.  What - if you
were to run and put in place a diver training programme - would you have as
the requirements?  :-)))

> BTW, I got the raising arms above head business in treading water
> in my POOL training -- which meant in Open Water I.   Not advanced,
> or rescue, or whatever, because I got those training in the LAKE. :-)

It's been my experience that lake water is as unbreathable as ocean water!
And, yes, I accept the buoyancy factors between fresh and salt water! :-)))

> That's how I remember, ever since, how SILLY those training and TESTS
> were.  :-)

Perhaps you've never been exposed to a variety of training courses?  (I say
that, knowing that you're going to respond, and because I have an enormously
high regard for you - even if I do happen to disagree with everything you
say on this topic.)  :-))))))))))))

> Never BOUGHT it.  Never will BUY that notion that swimming WITHOUT
> FINS or treading water without arms OR fins have any redeeming value
> in the training or assessment of SCUBA competence.

You're right! :-) My old Granny could dive and clear a face mask - but she
was shit when it came to swimming back to safety!  :-)

> THAT's the result of Feeesh's antidisestablishmentarianism (or something
> like that) which resulted from independent THINKING, rather than listening
> to "party line" (whichever party <BG>) excuses on NO FIN.

LUV IT!! :-)))

> Never SCUBA dived without my fins, and never will.  That's my FINAL
> answer.  F:)))

Fins are good!  :-)

Strike