How do you define what makes a good diver

[cowboyneal]

Obviously it's time for me to resurrect my Diving Koan ((c) 2001)

A Zen Scuba Instructor saw five of his students return from their last scuba diving practice carrying all of their scuba gear. When they had stopped, the teacher asked the students, "Why do you scuba dive?" The first student replied, "Scuba Diving is exercise and it is also good for you to learn how to breathe!" The teacher praised the student, saying, "You are a smart boy. When you grow old, you will not breathe as laboriously as I do." The second student replied, "I love to watch the coral and the rocks and sand pass by as I swim." The teacher commended the student, "Your eyes are open and you see the world." The third student replied, "When I dive, I am content to chant in my mind, nam myoho renge kyo." The teacher gave praise to the third student, "Your mind will travel with the ease of a properly weighted diver." The fourth student answered, "Diving under the water’s surface, I live in harmony with all beings." The teacher was pleased and said, "You are swimming as though on the golden path of non-harming." The fifth student replied, "Why teacher, I dive to dive." The teacher went and sat at the feet of the fifth student, and said, "I am your disciple."

 

[Thalassamania]

Neal: That's perfect ... I will remember that one.

I agree on the technical side, my personal concerns are regarding the attitdue side. Again, this is purely one component of my definition of a good diver.

Technical side or attitude side, they'd die before they let anything happen to their buddy, especially one that was depending upon them. This stuff that a "good diver" is necessarily a "nice guy" is horse pucky. It takes ego to be willing to stand out from the crowd and "nice guys" are in shorter supply in the ranks of those whom I'd classify as "good divers" than they are in the general public. I’ll grant you I’m fairly cynical, but I suggest that you check again; are you really sure that the “care and concern” you see is not well disguised condescension on a really good day?

 

[Diver0001]

This stuff that a "good diver" is necessarily a "nice guy" is horse pucky. It takes ego to be willing to stand out from the crowd

You're equating charisma with ego. To stand out from the crowd it takes vision, self confidence and the ability to rally people. Self confidence isn't the same as a big ego. Self confidence is the quality of being sure about yourself. Big egos are a sign of a person who has lost respect for others, which, to my way of thinking, is not a character trait of natrual leaders or of good scuba buddies.

R..

 

[TSandM]

Interestingly, what I've heard about GI3 is that, in person, he's totally different from on line, and much more personable. And the essay he wrote about their first record-breaking push in Wakulla spent a great deal of time praising his teammates on that dive. Some people simply should not be let loose with a keyboard . . .

I think there is definitely a difference between a good diver and a good buddy. I've done dives with beginners who were lovely companions underwater -- great people, great attitude, as attentive and reliable as they could physically be. They're pretty good buddies, but they're not good divers, yet.

I've done dives with people with good skills, where the dive wasn't enjoyable because we were simply not in tune. They're good divers, but not good buddies for me.

I've watched people with excellent in-water skills, as far as buoyancy and trim and lack of impact on the environment, but their procedures with respect to their buddies (separation, communication, etc.) were not at all acceptable to me. I wouldn't call them good divers, although by their own standards and those of their own buddies, they might well be.

So, there's a situation where you might get totally different evaluations of the same person -- When the evaluators have very different standards for what THEY think is a good diver.

 

[pilot fish]

I think there is definitely a difference between a good diver and a good buddy. I've done dives with beginners who were lovely companions underwater -- great people, great attitude, as attentive and reliable as they could physically be. They're pretty good buddies, but they're not good divers, yet.

ts&m

That bears repeating. Great point. That is so true. I have been on dives where the person had 500 plus dives but knew squat about being a buddy, while I did dives with newer divers that had excellent buddy skills but were still learning some of the finer points of diving. Good uw skills do not necessarily translate to good buddy skills.

 

[UnderSeaBumbleBee]

Why is it that when any question is asked, someone decides to bash DIR? First in my original post, I specifically asked what you think it takes to make a person a good diver in your own words and to not mention any agency or other person. I did not ask who you don’t like or who you think has ego problems.

So for those of you taking pot shots whether they are true or not, I am going to label as an unsafe diver with ego problems of your own, someone who must put down others in order to make their point or make them feel good, someone who is unable to lift up without tearing down others.

I honestly don’t care if you love George Irvine or if you hate him. I really don’t care either way. What I am asking for is specific traits and abilities of what makes a good diver. While most posts have been every helpful, those taking shots at others are both unwarranted and unhelpful. We should be able to discuss trim buoyancy, planning and so forth without people bringing up George’s name. For those who constantly bring it up in a negative way, you seem to have some unholy fascination with George and can’t get him off your mind. You need to dive more and think about George less.

You should be able to say that you accept or reject a certain piece of gear or technique based on the merits of what you think and your ability to evaluate the gear or technique on your own. If you are only able to accept or reject it in relation to your thoughts about George, then you are not a good diver because you are unable to form opinions and think on your own. That can be people on both sides of the George fence---I love this and this is GOOD because George says and I must accept all things George or I hate this and this is BAD because George likes it and I must avoid all things George.

I have enjoyed reading from those who are able to share specific traits and skills that make a good diver and hope to read more. Reading your thoughts has taught me a bit on the subject of what is a good diver.

 

[Diver0001]

Why is it that when any question is asked, someone decides to bash DIR?

As far as I can remember, Leah, this is the first post in the thead that has mentioned DIR.

R..

 

[OHGoDive]

As far as I can remember, Leah, this is the first post in the thead that has mentioned DIR.

There were a couple of people discussing a point about whether a skilled diver like George Irvine is neccessarily a *good* diver or more importantly a *good* buddy due to his ego tripping.

In my mind this is a logical thing to discuss in a thread about what makes a good diver, especially given that George Irvine is an icon of the skilled diver to a lot of people.

R..

I think the point that she was trying to make was that she didn't originally ask who was a good diver, but, what traits make a good diver. It's a valid point.

 

[UnderSeaBumbleBee]

As far as I can remember, Leah, this is the first post in the thead that has mentioned DIR.

I guess I am feeling a bit Barny Fife like this morning and want to "NIP IT IN THE BUD!!! NIP IT!! NIP IT!! NIP IT!! But Leah . . :no :no .NIP IT!!

It seems that when a thread goes this direction, it goes down hill fast. Someone makes a snide remark about DIR, the DIR folks feel the need to respond and the whole intent of the thread is lost and turned into something that usually has little if any value at all to the original question.

I wanted to avoid this totally in this thread which is why I worded my question and ask that people respond in their own words and leave others and agencies out of it. I think if you are a George fan or not you can discuss principles, skills, and diving without making the debate about George or anyone else.

I think for instace someone can be a good driver in a Ford Pinto--which we all know the Pinto had a lot of problems or someone can be a safe driver in a top of the line car from NASCAR. Certainly the gear has a role in performance, but you can be a safe driver even if you don't have the best gear. The gear or car will affect performance, but you can still be good. You can be a good driver driving on different types of roads, ie dirt, highway, side streets on a race track. The more demanding the road, the more demand on the driver.

It is the same with diving, variety of gear and dive sites, variety of demands and many different people can and are good divers. Part of being a good diver is diving within your limits and skills.

Anyway, if we were talking about what makes a good driver to the average person or to your kid learning how to drive, we wouldn't talk to them about how great Dale E, or Boddy L, Mario A, or Jeff G are. Would you talk about a NASCAR driver that you don't like and who he drives in order to teach your kid how to drive. Would you spend all your time giving a blow by blow account of his technique? We would talk about basics and core skills so that our kid or our friend could be a good driver.

That is where I am going with this. You are sitting down and talking to your kid or you good friend about what it means to be a good diver, so what would you tell them that is and what would you have them focus on. If you spent your time discussing the bio of George or some other person or agency, they would never learn the basics of what a good diver is although they could tell you why like or don't like George or some other person or agency.

 

[UnderSeaBumbleBee]

I think the point that she was trying to make was that she didn't originally ask who was a good diver, but, what traits make a good diver. It's a valid point.

Yes that is my question, not WHO, but WHAT!