Disturbing trend in diving?

[boulderjohn]

Scuba is never a competition and is therefore never a sport. It’s a hobby. Like hiking for example.

We have had this discussion on ScubaBoard many, many times. The English language has had many different uses for the word "sport" over the centuries. Read the magazine Sports Afield, and you will learn that shooting ducks is a sport. Gambling is often referred to as a sport--betting on horse races used to be called "the sport of kings."

What all those past threads have boiled down to is matching each poster's personal definition of "sport" to diving. Each opinion is therefore correct.

 

[JuLe]

Scuba is never a competition and is therefore never a sport. It’s a hobby. Like hiking for example.

I beg to disagree. We just recently had the national championship competition in scuba here in Finland. The competition was in a swimming pool and consisted of different tasks the teams (2 divers = buddy team) had to do underwater. Tasks were about bouancy control, problem solving and so on. These were judged, points awarded and so on. It was mostly for good fun, but there definately was also a very real competitive aspect to the whole thing.

 

[Scuba-74]

It used to be called a sport (NAUI Sport Diver).
Then it became a hobby.
Now it's an experience.

Calling it "a sport" always bugged me. A "sport" implies certain fitness threshold to be met. Visiting any warm water recreational diving destination proves that it's not the case with diving.

 

[Soloist]

Calling it "a sport" always bugged me. A "sport" implies certain fitness threshold to be met. Visiting any warm water recreational diving destination proves that it's not the case with diving.

Agreed. Unfortunately the "competition" starts at the all you can eat buffet and ends at the bar.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Calling it a sport to me depends on how the knowledge is applied.
So, back when we had freedive abalone diving going on around here I would call that more of a sport just based on the physicality if it. That goes for freedive spear fishing too. Those activities required a certain level of physical skill and prowess which even though may or may not be competitive at the moment still represent it to be a sport more than not.
It's "sporting", or maybe taking certain species may not be "sporting", etc.
Conditions can be "sporty".
Then there are spearfishing competitions where it is definitely a sport. There can be personal competitions between buddies or rivalries which could turn it into a sport.
All this could be applied the same to scuba diving.
I think there was also a historical aspect to the title too for marketing purposes, for instance back in the 50's and 60's calling something a sport had a certain appeal to it because that meant if you did it you had physical prowess and a certain swagger by being involved.
It's probably referred to as a sport here locally just based on that history and the way it's applied.
A reef check diver doing surveys probably won't refer to their application as a sport, it would be called scientific diving.
When I used to clean boats that was work diving.
Our urchin diving would be considered work diving and maybe pseudo scientific diving even though we are civilians/amateurs.
Somebody who takes diving seriously and only goes to the tropics to photograph might be a hobby diver, albeit a serious hobby.
A technical diver/cave diver might be called an advanced hobby or exploration diver (if they are exploring).
And a person who only goes in fully guided dives and has their hand held the entire time could be referred to as a person just wanting an experience.

Sport Diver
Work Diver
Scientific Diver
Exploration Diver
Hobby Diver
Try it for the experience Diver

 

[Scuba-74]

There are lots of things about the hobby/sport (whichever you choose to call it) of scuba that leave me "flabbergasted". Cave diving is an example. For me that is a bridge too far, a level of risk that I would never feel comfortable accepting, no matter how much excellent, high-quality training I were to receive for it. Same for wreck penetration. Nope nope nope. Diving solo also comes to mind...

This is a very relatable perspective of a recently certified diver. I remember taking my OWD course at a resort in the Dominican Republic in 2004. I had a very knowledgeable and nice instructor from Germany. When we were done with the open water dives, I've said to him that it must be really nice to be in this line of work, be able to dive so much and be paid for it. His response left me somewhat shocked. He said that tropical diving was nothing but a job for him, and what he really enjoyed was... ice diving. I didn't understand it back then.

Many years later, I completely understand the draw of less conventional, more specialized, and more demanding types of diving. I'm doing everything that you mentioned except the caves, and enjoying it more than a run-of-the-mill warm water dive. Haven't done ice diving yet, but have enjoyed a few winter dives in the US Northeast. There is a good chance that in a few years you'd laugh at how the things you enjoy once seemed so risky and dangerous.

 

[Divin'Papaw]

I beg to disagree. We just recently had the national championship competition in scuba here in Finland. The competition was in a swimming pool and consisted of different tasks the teams (2 divers = buddy team) had to do underwater. Tasks were about bouancy control, problem solving and so on. These were judged, points awarded and so on. It was mostly for good fun, but there definately was also a very real competitive aspect to the whole thing.

Well there you go. That would be a sport!!

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Do people here think that maybe if divers had to be more personally involved with diving, instead if just wanting to experience it without any of the annoying details, they might commit more to becoming more serious about the hobby in the long term?
I always found that stuff given for free had less emotional and material value then something that I had to work for and or pay more money for.
In this case the cost would be the time of commitment (and maybe money) to learn the stuff fully and embrace the details.
If I put my whole heart and wallet into it I'd certainly want to apply that knowledge and make it pay for itself.
I remember when I certified OW I was fascinated by the tables and working them. I thought how cool it was that I had to do something that my safety and avoidance from getting bent relied on. It might sound weird, but understanding and applying these rules was empowering to me.
Everyone else couldn't wait to buy a computer as soon as they could, and eventually I did too.
Then I would read about the DIR guys doing ratio deco on the fly and they made fun of computers and claimed they were for amateurs and suckers. It made me feel stupid and lazy for buying one. That was 25 years ago now and a lot has changed.
Computers are absolutely the way to go and I'm guessing ratio deco got shot full of holes and kind of died. I'll bet most DIR divers use a computer now.
I'm just guessing.

 

[Scuba-74]

I feel it is relevant to share in this thread my recent (December) experience, where reliance on a dive guide could have ended far worse than it did.

It was in the middle of a weeklong liveaboard trip in Egypt, by that time there was an established rapport and trust between a group of 8 divers and a dive guide. We were doing the first in a series of 3 dives on the wreck of the "SS Thistlegorm". Conditions were bad, it was beginning to get dark, and there was a strong current from south to north, i.e. from the stern to the bow, opposite to what it typically is there. The dive site was new to all except 1, maybe 2 divers in the group.

In the briefing, the guide explicitly said it would be a no-penetration dive, due to conditions and the fact that we were going to do a dedicated penetration dive of the cargo holds the next day. We tied at the stern, proceeded towards the bow, with the current. My dive buddy and I were 2nd or 3d pair behind the guide. Pretty soon, before reaching the bow, the guide stops, gives/receives and OK signal from all, then penetrates the wreck, in the area, as I later learned, of the captains quarters and I guess the bridge.

We swam inside the wreck following the diver in front for maybe 10 min. Upon exiting, the first thing I see is the dive guide and a 2-3 of divers, including my dive buddy, starting to swim away from the superstructure, over the debris field amidships, while ascending at an angle. I follow. A couple of minutes later I'm in a complete blue water, the wreck is no longer visible, I can barely keep up with the group kicking against strong current in my short travel fins. Since we are ascending gradually, have to pay constant attention to the depth gauge.

Another 3 or so min later I don't see anyone or anything anymore, trying to follow the direction we were going, while kicking at full force. Pressure is about 1000psi, maybe a bit more, I'm overconsuming. A few minutes later I'm fully considering deploying an SMB and doing a drifting safety stop, where finally I see the anchor line with about 10 divers on it, blowing like flags, horizontally, in the current.

All is well that ends well. When I questioned the guide on what happened, he said one of the divers became low on air, and they had to bolt to the anchor line without communicating with the rest of the group. We never found out if there was indeed a diver that signaled him that.

Now, there are some extenuating circumstances, of course. For one, it's an advanced dive site, and everyone going there are expected to have experience and a degree of self-reliance. Also, our dive group was considered the most advanced out of the 3 groups on the trip, we always enjoyed longer and more demanding dives than the other 2 groups, and perhaps the guide would not have done what he'd done knowing that there are less experienced people in the group. But, the whole thing brought me at the edge of my comfort zone, which very rarely happens. I can see how this situation could have resulted in at least some people from the group not reaching the line and being blown away in the dusk.

 

[boulderjohn]

Do people here think that maybe if divers had to be more personally involved with diving, instead if just wanting to experience it without any of the annoying details, they might commit more to becoming more serious about the hobby in the long term?

Back in the 1990s, my wife and I enjoyed a vacation in Cozumel, during which I took a Discover Scuba class. I liked it, but I won't go beyond that. (I had taken one many years before--another story.) We also bought an unusual time share--one that wasn't a total tipoff like most--it had a finite number of coupons, so we weren't locked into the normal endless nightmare. We were planning to use it to come to Cozumel every other year. I had no plans to be certified.

Two years later our next visit was approaching, and circumstances put me in Puerto Vallarta for a week. I decided to get certified there in anticipation of going to Cozumel. That diving experience was barely satisfying, and because they skipped so many standards I was barely competent. So I arrived at Cozumel as a certified but barely competent diver with the goal of doing a few days of diving while I was there, and then repeating that minimal experience every couple of years.

So no one forced me to be "more personally involved with diving," If I had been required to do any more than that minimum I did, I would have skipped it altogether. I would still be a non-diver.

What made the difference was first my realization that I was barely qualified. I immediately took the AOW course, and doing 5 dives with an instructor did wonders for my skill level. The next difference maker was my experiences that week. I had some incredible dives. On my first post AOW dive, our group wound through the intricacies of the Palancar Caves reef, and we were joined throughout by a huge grouper and a huge angelfish, both being within arms reach of us. By the end of the week I was hooked, and we were soon planning all vacations to locations famous for diving.