Advanced Divers too soon?..

[archiebald]

Your profile lists 0 to 25 dives... If that is correct, I am curious as to how you have arrived at the opinion that the "50" diver may be far better than the "1,000" diver?

Simple. On the basis that someone who has completed approximately 28 TRAINING dives plus the additional 22 to reach "master diver" and studied maybe an additional 100 hours of theory to a far higher level just might be a safer, more competent diver than a guy who just took OW (5 training dives) then goes off and dives in his own style with no further training possibly falling into dangerous habits and shortcuts along the way.

Just to be clear, I'm not claiming this is true in every case, just that it could be and that having 1,000 dives under your belt doesn't automatically guarantee a better or safer diver. And, I totally agree that a master diver with 1,000 dives in his log book is for sure going to be a better diver than a master diver with 51 dives.

Akimbo was complaining about the "master diver" moniker not reflecting the experience of the diver, but it doesn't claim to. It only relates to being at the top of the training tree (for non professionals), not experience.

This is not unique to scuba diving, it is just common sense. The same idea can be applied to any other activity. For example, I have been skiing for about 20 years with only a couple of lessons at the start but I am sure that a newcomer with 2 months of proper coaching could easily ski faster, better and safer than me. On the same basis I contend that a 1,000 dive OW diver is not automatically a better, safer diver than a 51 dive master diver.

 

[dumpsterDiver]

28 training dives might mean a lot, then again it may mean very little. I have seen so many people who have a lot of certifications, even people taking higher level tech training classes that were just scary in the water. I'm not sure that 100 hours of theory is beneficial to a recreational diver, unless they are a really slow learner..

Simple. On the basis that someone who has completed approximately 28 TRAINING dives plus the additional 22 to reach "master diver" and studied maybe an additional 100 hours of theory to a far higher level just might be a safer, more competent diver than a guy who just took OW (5 training dives) then goes off and dives in his own style with no further training possibly falling into dangerous habits and shortcuts along the way.

Just to be clear, I'm not claiming this is true in every case, just that it could be and that having 1,000 dives under your belt doesn't automatically guarantee a better or safer diver. And, I totally agree that a master diver with 1,000 dives in his log book is for sure going to be a better diver than a master diver with 51 dives.

Akimbo was complaining about the "master diver" moniker not reflecting the experience of the diver, but it doesn't claim to. It only relates to being at the top of the training tree (for non professionals), not experience.

This is not unique to scuba diving, it is just common sense. The same idea can be applied to any other activity. For example, I have been skiing for about 20 years with only a couple of lessons at the start but I am sure that a newcomer with 2 months of proper coaching could easily ski faster, better and safer than me. On the same basis I contend that a 1,000 dive OW diver is not automatically a better, safer diver than a 51 dive master diver.

 

[ScubaSteve1962]

Why does it matter
Why does it matter when someone takes their AOW because it's not the way you would do it, then it isn't right? Some people will got straight to AOW right out of OW just to get it over with, that doesn't mean that the all off a sudden think they're advanced divers. And you will also have some out or OW that will do the risky dives just because they can. The ones that know that the only way to become a better diver is by diving. This reminds me of a dive trip I went on, I'm AOW and took the fast track, (right out of OW). I was in Key largo talking to some diver that were going out on one of the deep wrecks, I said I was going to keep my dives shallow, because I had some things to work on. Their comment was oh you have to be AOW to go anyway, I replied I was, but with my sac rate, it wasn't worth it. Well that evening I ran into them and they said the should have went shallow also because with there sac rate it wasn't worth it. I guess my point is if you don't practice your skill does it matter when you get it. And when you get it what does it really mean??

 

[jar546]

:shocked2::shocked2:Am I the only one who has the complaint about newbie divers going right to Advanced Diver Certification too quickly. I became NAUI Openwater Certified in 2010 and when I expressed interest in working on my NAUI Advanced Openwater, my Dive Instructor informed me that he wouldn't consider taking me through the course until I had at least 25 logged dives in my book,best advice I could have gotten. He told me that he'd tell that to anyone he took through NAUI Openwater. Get
the experience, practice the skills; buoyancy, breathing, relaxing underwater, buddy breathing, etc. I waited until I had 50 dives in my logbook.
Last month I took my NAUI Advanced Openwater Certification. 7 of the students in my classes informed me that they only had their 5 checkout PADI Openwater dives in their logbooks. 5 of them told me they were "Rescue Divers" for their local Fire Department near Pittsburgh, PA! I lost count how many times I was kicked or punched by these "divers" as they flailed around underwater. They were losing weights and pouches, bouyancy control was non-exitstent. They were down to 500# of air in less than 20 minutes and we hadn't even left the platforms! And as far as using a compass, they had the deer in the headlights look.
I had questioned my Dive Instructor about his edict about 25 dive minimum and how these folks could take Advanced Openwater with only 5 dives. He said that if they were NAUI Certified, he would have turned them away, but since they were PADI, he had to take them through the course?
I read with interest, various postings concerning diving fatalities at Dutch Springs where I do most of my diving. I firmly believe that the majority of dive "Accidents" are preventable by continous diving and practice. Most of the time when I dive at Dutch I tend to be the one with the most expereience and that's only 75 logged dives. But virtually every 1st dive of the day, we start at a platform and we practice buoyancy, relaxed breathing, buddy breathing, mask clearing and/or removal. A few weeks ago I had a group that one individual had all the latest and greatest dive gear. His regs alone were worth more than all my wife's dive gear and mine combined. When we got in the water he froze in panic. Got him out and stayed with him for awhile. We descended together and just enjoyed a nice. leisurely dive at about 20-25 feet deep once he got himself together and acclimated. Found out later he was PADI Advanced with 11 total dives to his credit.
I guess all I'm saying is that maybe some divers need to consider getting more quality underwater time, work on their dive skills, and enjoy the sport more before trying to "Advance". Anybody agree? Disagree? Thanks

This is my take on the bold type:

1) The instructor believes that 25 dives under your belt is what is needed to help you become an advanced NAUI diver.
2) The same instructor then makes a "financial" decision to provide NAUI AOW training to students just out of PADI OW even though they don't meet the requirements he wants of you.
3) In the end, yourself and the other PADI divers will have the same NAUI AOW card. I ask you where the consistency is with this instructor? They never have to show a PADI card again as long as they have that NAUI AOW card. You are now equals in the plastic card realm

 

[Tigerman]

...
For example, I have been skiing for about 20 years with only a couple of lessons at the start but I am sure that a newcomer with 2 months of proper coaching could easily ski faster, better and safer than me.
...

And Ive been skiing, both alpine and cross-country for almost 30 years and also snowboarding for ~20 years with NO pro coaching. You mean that defines you as a better skier than me, just because you had a couple of skiing lessons?

Or maybe you think the 18-yearold with a brand new drivers license that took more supervised training to get than when I got mine 15 years ago is a better driver than I am?

You might be a better skier than me, thanks to your experience, but the 18-yearold definetly is NOT a better driver, also thanks to his lack of experience.
I agree that someone with 200 dives might be as experienced as one with 350, but someone with 50 dives just wont have had even the CHANCE to experience what someone with 200 dives have regardless of wether or not hes holding a master scuba diver cert.
Infact quite possibly someone with 50 dives and a master scuba diver card has had LESS chance to experience than someone with "just 50 dives" simply because 50 dives+msd means youve barely dived without supervision at all and as such never needed to be self-sufficient..

 

[eelnoraa]

Just keep in mind, "Advanced Open Water", there is nothing advanced about it. It is really a OW2, an extension of the basic OW class. Taking AOW after OW isn't a problem. BUT thinking you are an advanced diver after completing AOW is the real problem

 

[DevonDiver]

Well... it is 'advanced'. It is advanced open water.

i.e. you're still in kindergarten, just not the newest guy there anymore.

I don't know why people get so hung up on the military connotations of 'master' diver... I heard that PADI's latest idea was to create a copy of the fundies course, where they teach nitrox and team skills... I think it'll be called: Scuba Enriched Air Level - Team Diver.

 

[eelnoraa]

Really!!! IMO, they already have something similar. Fundie in the context of PADI is really aow+nitrox+drysuit+a little of rescue. Just GUE conducts it in a very strict and disciplined fashion. PADI's is more like a attendance class.

 

[DevonDiver]

No, not really. It was a joke... pitched too subtly I think

 

[dumpsterDiver]

And Ive been skiing, both alpine and cross-country for almost 30 years and also snowboarding for ~20 years with NO pro coaching. You mean that defines you as a better skier than me, just because you had a couple of skiing lessons?

Or maybe you think the 18-yearold with a brand new drivers license that took more supervised training to get than when I got mine 15 years ago is a better driver than I am?

You might be a better skier than me, thanks to your experience, but the 18-yearold definetly is NOT a better driver, also thanks to his lack of experience.
I agree that someone with 200 dives might be as experienced as one with 350, but someone with 50 dives just wont have had even the CHANCE to experience what someone with 200 dives have regardless of wether or not hes holding a master scuba diver cert.
Infact quite possibly someone with 50 dives and a master scuba diver card has had LESS chance to experience than someone with "just 50 dives" simply because 50 dives+msd means youve barely dived without supervision at all and as such never needed to be self-sufficient..

Yeah but he was comparing 50 dives to 1000 dives not 200... I was going to argue the point further, but the individual has less than 24 dives himself and is apparently not speaking from experience.

Who would you rather go out to sea with? A 19-yr old who just passed his captain's exam (and got his license) or the old salt who never became a "captain" but has been running boats offshore for 25 years and has seen all kinds of things?

I do dives that exceed recreational limits. If someone wants to go with me, I have very little interest if they have a card that says they can dive to 175 feet, in fact if they show it to me without asking, it would make me nervous. What I am far more interested in is how many similar dives they have done and possibly how long has it been since they last dove. (Especially since I don't have any of those technical dive certifications myself).