DaleC
Contributor
Sure one can take bits and pieces of anything and find benefit in a different arena, I do that all the time; but rarely does wholesale transplanting between two fields work out optimally.
Ever seen someone shifting up and down the gears, drafting and switching lanes back and forth in commuter traffic
Ever seen someone in skins and a helmet ripping through a crowd on a resort ski hill
Ever see someone duck hunting acting like they are running down Bin Laden
Ever seen someone on a rec dive looking and acting like they are dropping onto the Andrea Doria.
DevonDiver said: I get the impression that DIR focused agencies absolutely assume that divers will eventually progress to technical/cave diving - which is probably true for them, given the demographic they attract. In contrast, non-DIR agencies don't make any assumptions about the student's ultimate goals or the inevitability of progression to tekkie status.
Absolutely. Now, seeing that the vast majority of rec divers come out of non DIR agencies it would take wishful dreaming or social engineering to expect DIR strategies to work well with most rec divers, most of the time. The system is primarily based on everyone being on the same page - which they are not.
Reliance on standardization becomes sub optimal - it is far more advantageous to have a working exposure to many different systems.
Reliance on your buddy being there with your back up gas is sub optimal - better to become self reliant.
Scalability falls apart because rec diving is the apex for most rec divers.
I could go on but my fingers are tired. One can say that the real solution is to change the rec world but that's also wishful thinking, it is what it is. I also don't knock anyone for their choices or the defense of them but I have the right to mine and I will defend them as well, especially on a discussion forum. If no one stands up and cals BS the perception is that a small minority are representative of diving. The DIR system is great, for what it was designed for, but it only represents a small fraction of the market share of rec diving philosophy and no more valid than many others.
And the line is often drawn by one side that cannot accept change or deviation coming from anywhere but their organization. The truth is there are good things that come from other regimes. The confusion comes when tech solutions are suggested to the novice rec diver without any consideration of what that might look like outside a holistic approach.
Ever seen someone shifting up and down the gears, drafting and switching lanes back and forth in commuter traffic
Ever seen someone in skins and a helmet ripping through a crowd on a resort ski hill
Ever see someone duck hunting acting like they are running down Bin Laden
Ever seen someone on a rec dive looking and acting like they are dropping onto the Andrea Doria.
DevonDiver said: I get the impression that DIR focused agencies absolutely assume that divers will eventually progress to technical/cave diving - which is probably true for them, given the demographic they attract. In contrast, non-DIR agencies don't make any assumptions about the student's ultimate goals or the inevitability of progression to tekkie status.
Absolutely. Now, seeing that the vast majority of rec divers come out of non DIR agencies it would take wishful dreaming or social engineering to expect DIR strategies to work well with most rec divers, most of the time. The system is primarily based on everyone being on the same page - which they are not.
Reliance on standardization becomes sub optimal - it is far more advantageous to have a working exposure to many different systems.
Reliance on your buddy being there with your back up gas is sub optimal - better to become self reliant.
Scalability falls apart because rec diving is the apex for most rec divers.
I could go on but my fingers are tired. One can say that the real solution is to change the rec world but that's also wishful thinking, it is what it is. I also don't knock anyone for their choices or the defense of them but I have the right to mine and I will defend them as well, especially on a discussion forum. If no one stands up and cals BS the perception is that a small minority are representative of diving. The DIR system is great, for what it was designed for, but it only represents a small fraction of the market share of rec diving philosophy and no more valid than many others.
And the line is often drawn by one side that cannot accept change or deviation coming from anywhere but their organization. The truth is there are good things that come from other regimes. The confusion comes when tech solutions are suggested to the novice rec diver without any consideration of what that might look like outside a holistic approach.
