Best agency for learning Tech diving - criteria given - honest :)

[Patoux01]

... and that's the kind of comment that makes the GUE advocates come off as arrogant.

Isn't going deep the whole point of taking a tech class? I mean, if you're not going to go deep, recreational training is really all you need.

The problem I see with a lot of GUE training is that it goes too far in the other direction. Back in the days when I was diving the wrecks in Lake Washington almost every week-end I once buddied up with a guy who was GUE Tech 1 certified for a 150-foot dive on an old WWII bomber. As we were getting ready for the dive he commented "I've been training for two years to do this dive". Really? That's just friggen' sad. And while his skills were excellent, his lack of practical application had held him back ... this poor guy had spent two years diving in the same dive site he'd taken his OW class in, week-after-week of doing endless drills. I guess that's fun for some people, but it would bore the crap out of me. And it doesn't give you the practical application that it takes to become "good" at any skill ... classes and drills are an artificial environment, and after a certain point there's little to be gained by repeated practice doing the same things over and over and over.

Not all GUE training does that, but over the years I have noticed that our local GUE community tends to spend the majority of their time diving the same site over and over and over ... and it happens to be the same site where most of them took their recreational training. To my concern, that's a bit disappointing ... given what the "E" in GUE stands for ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Sorry I'm late answering this.

My point is simply: fundies tec pass + tec 1 takes more time than going to do AN/DP or an extended range at TDI (or rec tx at IANTD), you may like it or not but it's simply true. I simply meant that. And since those classes don't run as often as ANDP, well you can wait a looong time (or travel/make an instructor come). Also since fundies don't grant any depth, I assume he's already certified to 40, and so his fundies wouldn't let him go "deep".

From my (little) experience with GUE, yes those guys will sometimes go do training dives (even after being certified, simply to help the new ones getting their cert), yes they'll not necessarily want me there because they'll have to watch over me as I'm basically a burden to them, but no, what you describe is simply nowhere close to what the training is or should be. If he has spent 2 years in 3m of water, he either dived once every few months, or liked it but had to make it look "uncool" because someone was pressuring him.

On the other hand, I sometimes dive with one of them, I'm in SM and he's in twins, we don't care at all. GUE is slightly more open (at least in my part of the world, and the few "names" I've had the chance to talk to) than what you tend to show.

Ah, and I'm not GUE certified because I dive in SM and have no experience in BM. Although I'd love to do the fundies, I'll do them once I consider I master my current rig well enough.

 

[ScubaInChicago]

What isn't being brought up is how many other agencies have safety in mind when teaching this bite sized cours? Doing 165' on air with an END of ??? Or advanced Nitrox/Deco to 150' on air, wtf? Why allow that kind of *****ty training to be allowed in any agency?

---------- Post added April 1st, 2015 at 09:10 PM ----------

I can tell you switching from 30/30 to 32% @100' is mind blowing.

---------- Post added April 1st, 2015 at 09:19 PM ----------

As for time between training, my teammate and I got our Fundies Tech pass on the first try and passed Tech 1 2 months later with arguably one of the toughest GUE instructors on the roster. We did a quite a few training dives, but they all were fun dives first with goofing off second, and drills mixed in. BTW, the best time to do an OOG drill is when your dive buddy grabs onto something and is in the middle of relieving themselves.

 

[Warren_L]

If we can get back to the instructor v. agency question, I am going to say that although the instructor is important, in some cases the agency is as well. In my tech training, I left one instructor/agency for another, and it was very much the agency, not the instructor, that triggered the change. The problem is that it is hard for someone looking at agencies from the outside to tell the difference. Here is a short list of things that might be considered.

I would wholeheartedly agree that the agency does indeed matter.

@Epoque - I believe the agency does matter moreso than the general discussion so far might lead one to believe, at least in my opinion. The instructor is ultimately the one who does the teaching and evaluation, so I do firmly believe that the instructor is going to be the single most important factor in deciding what training progression to undertake, but I also believe this should not be the prime consideration to the exclusion of the agency. The agency sets the philosophy, as well the curriculum and standards, so you really should be aligned with the agency in this respect to get the most out of your training and your subsequent diving. I am not saying that the instructor shouldn't be the prime consideration, but I think sometimes we hear so much about people saying that it is all about the instructor so that what the agency brings to the table is overshadowed.

The other consideration that I don't see people talking much about are your intended dive buddies - whether you have any specific people you plan on diving with or teaming up with (unless of course, you are planning on solo diving which case this point is irrelevant), or if perhaps you are expecting to just buddy up with instabuddies you happen to meet up with who have the appropriate qualifications. If you have specific people you want to dive with, it likely makes things easier if you are all trained similarly, so here, both the instructor and agency would be a factor.

Bottom line is to do your research on both instructors and agencies available to you and don't make decisions based on a single metric.

 

[Jack Hammer]

Quite a few instructors teach for multiple agencies. That is a fact, a fact that should be taken into consideration when deciding solely on an agency based training route.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Sorry I'm late answering this.

My point is simply: fundies tec pass + tec 1 takes more time than going to do AN/DP or an extended range at TDI (or rec tx at IANTD), you may like it or not but it's simply true. I simply meant that. And since those classes don't run as often as ANDP, well you can wait a looong time (or travel/make an instructor come). Also since fundies don't grant any depth, I assume he's already certified to 40, and so his fundies wouldn't let him go "deep".

Ah ... I mistook the intent of your comment then, and apologize for construing it in a more negative way than you meant it. What you say makes perfect sense ...

From my (little) experience with GUE, yes those guys will sometimes go do training dives (even after being certified, simply to help the new ones getting their cert), yes they'll not necessarily want me there because they'll have to watch over me as I'm basically a burden to them, but no, what you describe is simply nowhere close to what the training is or should be. If he has spent 2 years in 3m of water, he either dived once every few months, or liked it but had to make it look "uncool" because someone was pressuring him.

Not always ... there are a certain percentage of people who are attracted to GUE because they need to be "perfect" before they'll challenge themselves ... and GUE was marketed to them as a way to satisfy that need. Our local GUE community does "tweak" (skills) dives every Wednesday evening at our local training site ... and turnout is usually pretty good. Since Koos and Lynne have gotten more involved with leading the local GUE community, they've become a lot more inclusive, and on those tweak dives, GUE-trained divers will happily buddy up with non-GUE divers to take them diving and help them understand what the program is all about. It's actually better run now than at any time in the past since I started diving in 2001. The diver I was referring to in my previous post came from an earlier era ... 2007 or so when we did our dive together ... and had done more than 100 "practice" dives before attempting an actual non-class, non-practice dive to Tech 1 depths. The program today makes more of an effort to get people out of Cove 2 and seeking more variations in dive sites and conditions. There's less emphasis on being one of the "cool kids" and far more emphasis on just going diving, having fun, and doing so in as safe a manner as possible.

On the other hand, I sometimes dive with one of them, I'm in SM and he's in twins, we don't care at all. GUE is slightly more open (at least in my part of the world, and the few "names" I've had the chance to talk to) than what you tend to show.

Quite a lot of what I tend to talk about happened over the past dozen years or so. Don't get me wrong ... I've had quite a few positive experiences with GUE-trained divers, have taken Fundies (twice), and taught NAUI classes for a year at the local dive shop that promotes and arranges for GUE instruction. So I've had quite a bit of exposure to both the best and the worst of what it has to offer ... enough to appreciate the benefits, and enough to decide that while I see the value in those benefits it simply would not be a good fit for some of the dives I want to do, and how I want to do them.

I'm not in any way trying to suggest that there's anything wrong with GUE ... I'm simply saying that it really isn't for everybody, as some in here seem to believe. It's not a panacea for everything that's wrong with dive instruction. Like most other offerings, it has its niche and appeal for certain types of divers. For others, it really would not be an appropriate choice ... however much some of its adherents seem to believe it would be.

Ah, and I'm not GUE certified because I dive in SM and have no experience in BM. Although I'd love to do the fundies, I'll do them once I consider I master my current rig well enough.

I started out diving backmounted doubles ... and did most of my tech diving that way. My NAUI Tech instructor was, for the most part, quite compatible with GUE ... and in fact did quite a lot of his tech dives with GUE trained divers. There were frequently a mix of GUE and NAUI Tech divers on his boat, and we usually dived together without issues. There were some minor differences in how we preferred to plan and conduct our dives, but these were always worked out prior to the dive as part of the planning process.

I started diving sidemount in 2011, and have since gotten rid of all of my backmounted doubles tanks and wings in favor of gear that's more compatible with the way I dive today. I prefer the freedom to choose to dive with people who use different configurations, and accept the additional effort and challenges that come with getting familiar with their gear as part of the planning process ... particularly the contingency planning for "bigger" dives. I also, at times, simply prefer to do those dives alone. Since I choose not to wholeheartedly accept the GUE approach to diving, it's not for me ... that simple. Doesn't mean I see anything wrong with it ... just that it's not the best choice for where I want my diving to go. The training is fine ... excellent, in fact. But if you choose to have options like I do, it's going to leave out a lot of things that you're going to need to know ... because their standard response to those things is to not do them ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[LiteHedded]

Ah ... I mistook the intent of your comment then, and apologize for construing it in a more negative way than you meant it. What you say makes perfect sense ...


Not always ... there are a certain percentage of people who are attracted to GUE because they need to be "perfect" before they'll challenge themselves ... and GUE was marketed to them as a way to satisfy that need. Our local GUE community does "tweak" (skills) dives every Wednesday evening at our local training site ... and turnout is usually pretty good. Since Koos and Lynne have gotten more involved with leading the local GUE community, they've become a lot more inclusive, and on those tweak dives, GUE-trained divers will happily buddy up with non-GUE divers to take them diving and help them understand what the program is all about. It's actually better run now than at any time in the past since I started diving in 2001. The diver I was referring to in my previous post came from an earlier era ... 2007 or so when we did our dive together ... and had done more than 100 "practice" dives before attempting an actual non-class, non-practice dive to Tech 1 depths. The program today makes more of an effort to get people out of Cove 2 and seeking more variations in dive sites and conditions. There's less emphasis on being one of the "cool kids" and far more emphasis on just going diving, having fun, and doing so in as safe a manner as possible.


Quite a lot of what I tend to talk about happened over the past dozen years or so. Don't get me wrong ... I've had quite a few positive experiences with GUE-trained divers, have taken Fundies (twice), and taught NAUI classes for a year at the local dive shop that promotes and arranges for GUE instruction. So I've had quite a bit of exposure to both the best and the worst of what it has to offer ... enough to appreciate the benefits, and enough to decide that while I see the value in those benefits it simply would not be a good fit for some of the dives I want to do, and how I want to do them.

I'm not in any way trying to suggest that there's anything wrong with GUE ... I'm simply saying that it really isn't for everybody, as some in here seem to believe. It's not a panacea for everything that's wrong with dive instruction. Like most other offerings, it has its niche and appeal for certain types of divers. For others, it really would not be an appropriate choice ... however much some of its adherents seem to believe it would be.


I started out diving backmounted doubles ... and did most of my tech diving that way. My NAUI Tech instructor was, for the most part, quite compatible with GUE ... and in fact did quite a lot of his tech dives with GUE trained divers. There were frequently a mix of GUE and NAUI Tech divers on his boat, and we usually dived together without issues. There were some minor differences in how we preferred to plan and conduct our dives, but these were always worked out prior to the dive as part of the planning process.

I started diving sidemount in 2011, and have since gotten rid of all of my backmounted doubles tanks and wings in favor of gear that's more compatible with the way I dive today. I prefer the freedom to choose to dive with people who use different configurations, and accept the additional effort and challenges that come with getting familiar with their gear as part of the planning process ... particularly the contingency planning for "bigger" dives. I also, at times, simply prefer to do those dives alone. Since I choose not to wholeheartedly accept the GUE approach to diving, it's not for me ... that simple. Doesn't mean I see anything wrong with it ... just that it's not the best choice for where I want my diving to go. The training is fine ... excellent, in fact. But if you choose to have options like I do, it's going to leave out a lot of things that you're going to need to know ... because their standard response to those things is to not do them ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

contrary to popular belief, GUE technical training does not require you to waive your rights to make your own grown-up dive choices. you can dive sidemount, mixed teams, CCR, anything that floats your boat. the instructors are doing just that, all over the world.

again, your issues with GUE appear to be with a certain group of divers and not the training itself, about which you (admittedly) don't really know all that much.
as the OP hasn't mentioned wanting to train in sidemount, I still say it's the best agency (his original question) for him to learn technical diving

sorry for chiming in so much on this but there's a lot of people out there with similar mindsets based on interactions with these GUE groups all over the world. I think actually taking the classes (beyond fundamentals) would go a long way to dispel these first impressions

 

[PfcAJ]

Do other agencies teach some sort of response to all the different types of configurations and procedures out there?

No, of course they don't. There's NO WAY they could cover every permutation that's popular, let alone possible.

To say that GUE "leaves out things you're going to need to know" is really no different than a TDI OC adv nitrox course leaving out responses to divers on CCRs.

The principles that GUE teaches (in-water control, gas planning with a reason behind it, problem solving, decompression) are quite universal in their application. I used those same principles when I did a 300ft cave dive with you CCR divers a few months ago.

To say that a diver trained by GUE can't dive with folks with other configurations just isn't accurate. As litehedded says above, this is evidenced by how many GUE trained divers also dive SM, CCR, mixed teams, etc. The base education (which is what OP is requesting) you get from GUE is outstanding, regardless of what you choose to do with it after the class.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

contrary to popular belief, GUE technical training does not require you to waive your rights to make your own grown-up dive choices. you can dive sidemount, mixed teams, CCR, anything that floats your boat. the instructors are doing just that, all over the world.

again, your issues with GUE appear to be with a certain group of divers and not the training itself, about which you (admittedly) don't really know all that much.
as the OP hasn't mentioned wanting to train in sidemount, I still say it's the best agency (his original question) for him to learn technical diving

sorry for chiming in so much on this but there's a lot of people out there with similar mindsets based on interactions with these GUE groups all over the world. I think actually taking the classes (beyond fundamentals) would go a long way to dispel these first impressions

... but you highlighted the wrong sentence ... try the last one. But if you choose to have options like I do, it's going to leave out a lot of things that you're going to need to know ... because their standard response to those things is to not do them ...

That is not a misimpression, and it has nothing to do with "groups". It has everything to do with the GUE approach to diving. If you want to dive mixed teams, or sidemount, GUE training cannot help you learn those things because they don't teach it. Whatever decisions you choose to make afterward are rather irrelevent to the issue ... the issue is what agency to choose for the training on planning and conducting a dive using the equipment and approach you want to use. If mixed teams and/or sidemount are your choices, why choose the agency that says "we don't do it", as opposed to one that actually offers training on the skills you seek to attain?

You keep repeating the same thing, despite the fact that I've already told you that you're mistaken. We've never met ... never dived together ... you know nothing about me or my associations 3500 miles distant from where you live, and yet you keep making assumptions despite being corrected already. I have no issues with the local GUE community. Many of them are friends and dive buddies. My decision not to pursue the training has nothing to do with them.

I'm telling you that, having tested those waters, the GUE approach to training wasn't to my taste ... it didn't offer what I was looking for. Simple as that.

... there is no "best" for everybody ... what's "best" for you may be a complete mismatch for someone else ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[PfcAJ]

... but you highlighted the wrong sentence ... try the last one. But if you choose to have options like I do, it's going to leave out a lot of things that you're going to need to know ... because their standard response to those things is to not do them ...

That is not a misimpression, and it has nothing to do with "groups". It has everything to do with the GUE approach to diving. If you want to dive mixed teams, or sidemount, GUE training cannot help you learn those things because they don't teach it.
... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Do you really expect a course that doesn't teach something to teach it?

If I signed up for a SM class I wouldn't expect it to teach my how to deal with a CCR, just as if I sign up for a GUE class I don't expect them to teach me sidemount stuff.

What class have you taken that meets this criteria of yours?

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Do other agencies teach some sort of response to all the different types of configurations and procedures out there?

No, of course they don't. There's NO WAY they could cover every permutation that's popular, let alone possible.

I didn't say every permutation ... I said the choices I wanted to make for how I wanted to dive.

Does GUE offer a class in sidemount? They certainly didn't when I wanted to learn it.

Do they offer a class in solo diving? No ... of course not ... it goes against the very foundation of their team diving approach.

Do they offer any training at all in diving mixed teams? If so I'll bet it ain't at the Tech 1 level ... which is what the OP is asking for.

So, why take training from an agency that won't offer those things if those are the choices you want to make? Seems to me to make sense to choose someone who offers what you're looking for, rather than trying for some "we'll make it fit" approach based on a philosophy that fundamentally believes that you'll be making the wrong choices.

To say that GUE "leaves out things you're going to need to know" is really no different than a TDI OC adv nitrox course leaving out responses to divers on CCRs.

... but my NAUI instruction covered those things.

The principles that GUE teaches (in-water control, gas planning with a reason behind it, problem solving, decompression) are quite universal in their application. I used those same principles when I did a 300ft cave dive with you CCR divers a few months ago.

... and my NAUI training covered those topics as well ... in surprisingly similar fashion to your GUE training, in fact..

To say that a diver trained by GUE can't dive with folks with other configurations just isn't accurate. As litehedded says above, this is evidenced by how many GUE trained divers also dive SM, CCR, mixed teams, etc. The base education (which is what OP is requesting) you get from GUE is outstanding, regardless of what you choose to do with it after the class.

I never said you couldn't dive with them ... I said your training won't cover how to. That's a true statement. Yes, the base education you get from GUE is outstanding ... I've said so repeatedly. It is not, however, either the only way to get outstanding training nor is it the best approach for everyone.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post added April 2nd, 2015 at 10:53 AM ----------

Do you really expect a course that doesn't teach something to teach it?

If I signed up for a SM class I wouldn't expect it to teach my how to deal with a CCR, just as if I sign up for a GUE class I don't expect them to teach me sidemount stuff.

What class have you taken that meets this criteria of yours?

My NAUI Trimix I class covered contingency planning for diving in mixed (CC/OC) teams.

My IANTD Sidemount class covered sidemount diving.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)