Another experience question.

[joe rock]

A number of threads discuss experience and talk about number of dives. One element of our profile here on SB is number of dives. Someone on another thread suggested it's not the number of dives, but the amount of bottom time. (For the sake of this question, I am asking we don't discuss diversity of dives as a barometer of experience.) From my own experience, when I first started diving I could suck down an AL80 in less than 30 minutes. Now the same dive could last 50+ minutes. Here's my questions:

1. Assuming they're the same exact dive, does my 50 minute dive add more to my experience than my 28 minute dive (I know, yea 22 minutes worth )?

2. Is total bottom time a better measure of experience? If you think so, why?

JR

 

[redacted]

I suspect you learned more in that first 28 minute dive than you did in that last 50+ minute dive. Count whatever you would like and enjoy the diving.

 

[all4scuba05]

If TIME is a good measure of experience, then Bottom Time would have to be it. The problem here is that the posters here have no way of knowing how the Original Poster dives so they use your Dive # as a desperate way to judge what type of diver you are. Hence the reason why some refuse to post their dive #'s. In some cases it's needed, and in others it's a way to get flamed. Life on the Board ain't always easy. Just spend less time here and more time diving. Come back after a 1000 dives and you get more "respect"

 

[nolatom]

It's variety of experience. The cold, dark, deep 24-minute dive is a sterner teacher than the warm, clear, mid-depth 55-minute. So it's difficult to generalize. A diver with experience in the greatest variety of conditions will probably be more adaptable and more ready to deal with the unexpected.

I like my Florida and FGB dives, but my occasional New England dives are a whole different kind of teacher. They're "good for me", like broccoli.

 

[fire_diver]

All of it play a part in how "experienced" a diver is. Bottom time is part. But just sitting on the bottom at 20 feet collecting time, doesn't help a diver grow.

The number of dives is important. The number of times a person puts thier gear together, and goes down, then comes back, breaks down and cleans can help a diver become more comfortable with thier gear and diving in general.

Now, I know you said to leave it out, but diversity is the MOST important part of being a better diver. If I go dive just my local lake, and only one spot on that lake, then I know that one spot. While I will be VERY good at diving that one spot, I will feel out of place and inadequate diving at altitude, or low vis, or cold, or currents. Gaining experience in many types of diving will help you grow the most in your diving.

That's my 2 psi anyway.

FD

 

[joe rock]

All of it play a part in how "experienced" a diver is. Bottom time is part. But just sitting on the bottom at 20 feet collecting time, doesn't help a diver grow.

The number of dives is important. The number of times a person puts thier gear together, and goes down, then comes back, breaks down and cleans can help a diver become more comfortable with thier gear and diving in general.

Now, I know you said to leave it out, but diversity is the MOST important part of being a better diver. If I go dive just my local lake, and only one spot on that lake, then I know that one spot. While I will be VERY good at diving that one spot, I will feel out of place and inadequate diving at altitude, or low vis, or cold, or currents. Gaining experience in many types of diving will help you grow the most in your diving.

That's my 2 psi anyway.
FD

I couldn't agree more. Especially you saying diversity IS the MOST important... I asked this question because of some comments I saw going back and forth on another thread.

The other replies are right on imo too. So much goes into experience it seems so silly without knowing the diversity of dives, the situations one faced etc. etc. to judge experience solely on objective numbers.

JR

 

[TSandM]

I think you can pretty accurately say that somebody with, say, twelve dives doesn't have much experience. So the numbers are useful at the low end.

Someone with 3000 dives may have a lot of experience, but that experience may be very narrow. He may be quite expert within his sphere, and completely at sea in other conditions. He may have developed superb skills, or he may have done the same semi-competent dive 3000 times. The high end is less informative, at least to me.

 

[SparticleBrane]

Quality, not quantity...

 

[Rick Inman]

Quality, not quantity...

I'd say, Quality of quanity...

 

[Gary D.]

I'd say, Quality of quanity...

YUP!

Gary D.