My Venture into GUE - Another view

[HenrikBP]

<snip> but will agree with the GUE slanderers here on SB that the <violins> "We went into Fundies, got humbled, but all passed and had fun"</violins> reports are either fairy tales from distant kingdoms or tasteless reverse-bragging from folks who spent a whole lot more sweat than they had the guts to admit.

Since you brought up my name (no "c" in Henrik ) in a previous post to prove a point, I went through my logbook to give you my personal "specifics":

- I'm not a "Young Buck" - turning 50 this year (no, I didn't need my logbook for that piece of info)

2007.04: OW training in NYC. OW referral dives in St. Croix. 13 dives total
2007.08: 4 horrible dives at DS in rented 7 mil. Never diving wet in cold water again.

2008.05: Caribbean dive trip in my own BP/W + reg w/ long hose (Other than reading SB, no help or mentoring in set-up or use). Dives 18 - 29

2009.05: Caribbean dive trip. Dives 30 - 48
2009.05: Dutch springs. Dives 49 & 50; my first dives in a drysuit.

- 2 dives at Dutch with Bob Sherwood and Ed Hayes for a GUE demo day. It cemented the fact that "I want me some of that". No actual skills instruction - more "here's how we like to do things".

- 11 training dives at Dutch with 2 people I later took Fundies with. 4 of those dives with Fundies grad Q. As best we could - based on internet videos - we focused on trim and kicks. Other than the dives with Q, we had *no clue* as to the Team diving aspect.

2009.08.10: Dive #65 was the first dive of my Fundies class.

In Fundies my logbook tells me I had 2 good days, 2 so-so days and 1 "train wreck" day. I struggled with trim - floaty feet in particular, back-kick as well as buoyancy control, especially on ascents.

Executive overview:
- PADI grad with 3 years and 48 dives as a vacation diver. 30 of those dives in BP/W + long hose wo/ mentoring.
- 15 dives in drysuit, 11 of those spent training for Fundies, doing what we could to emulate internet videos of trim and kicks.
- got a Fundies Rec pass after an additional day of practicing specific skills and of course another Eval dive.

I'm no "wunderkind" by any stretch, and I also don't think my training timeline illustrates a "Fairytale" or "Reverse Bragging". Others may judge differently ...?

I had a good time during Fundies. It was frustrating at times, but pretty much all of the frustration stemmed from my own unreasonable expectations as to my own performance. Edit: to echo John: My ego got in the way ...

Just a different perspective.

That said, I would have *loved* to have a back kick for Fundies, and will agree that Primer would be a good workshop to do before Fundies. I have since ~summer of 2010 recommended Primer as a 1st step.

Henrik

 

[Jax]

Why is it unfair to bring up another gear configuration during class, at least during the section of class where gear is being discussed? I think asking someone who's experienced in the DIR gear configuration is a huge step towards better understanding of side mount, as well as a better appreciation of BM. They're intimately familiar with the benefits of their standard gear configuration and can often quickly see where others come short (or rise above). I know I've had discussions with WKPP guys, GUE staff, GUE instructors, and Halcyon staff about the merits of DIR config vs SM config, and I think we've all learned from it. This discussion has lead to a better appreciation for my back mount rig, as well as a more thoughtful approach to my Sm rig.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that you argue why SM is better. I'm suggesting that you ask in what ways the configuration they're being paid to teach is better than others.

To be fair, many who have taken the course feel just the opposite.

1 - I asked Bob about SM before I came . . . I was not willing to belabor the point.
2 - Our time in the class was already tight, and bringing up an off-topic subject was, to me, unfair to my instructors and classmates.
3 - We had an out-of-class discussion, wherein Bob had some good points - it's not a mainstream configuration, it would need to be studied and course material written to include it, a standard would have to be recommended and adopted, all by a largely volunteer staff. I accept that.

Jax, just curious, how many dives have you done in the last 6 months that were for fun, without any gear changes having been made, and not dedicated to practicing skills? From your posts, you seem to be someone who strives to look and dive their best, but I almost wonder if your desire to be excellent has caused you to place unnecessary stress on yourself.

No, no desire to be excellent . . . but as my diving tends to be vacation diving, of average 3 times a year, I do not like the idea of no skills practice in between. Therefore, at least once a month in the pool. A little more often lately because of picking up sidemount.

The stress point is something people don't seem to 'get' about me . . . As soon as I accepted I was not going to meet course standards because of my stupidity, there was little stress. Okay, my back-kick wouldn't produce on demand, but that isn't rare! :lol:

I was more perturbed that my lack of performance would affect my teammates. I did my best not to, and believe it did not.

 

[Lobzilla]

Since you brought up my name (no "c" in Henrik ) in a previous post to prove a point, I went through my logbook to give you my personal "specifics":

- I'm not a "Young Buck" - turning 50 this year (no, I didn't need my logbook for that piece of info)

2007.04: OW training in NYC. OW referral dives in St. Croix. 13 dives total
2007.08: 4 horrible dives at DS in rented 7 mil. Never diving wet in cold water again.

2008.05: Caribbean dive trip in my own BP/W + reg w/ long hose (Other than reading SB, no help or mentoring in set-up or use). Dives 18 - 29

2009.05: Caribbean dive trip. Dives 30 - 48
2009.05: Dutch springs. Dives 49 & 50; my first dives in a drysuit.

- 2 dives at Dutch with Bob Sherwood and Ed Hayes for a GUE demo day. It cemented the fact that "I want me some of that". No actual skills instruction - more "here's how we like to do things".

- 11 training dives at Dutch with 2 people I later took Fundies with. 4 of those dives with Fundies grad Q. As best we could - based on internet videos - we focused on trim and kicks. Other than the dives with Q, we had *no clue* as to the Team diving aspect.

2009.08.10: Dive #65 was the first dive of my Fundies class.

In Fundies my logbook tells me I had 2 good days, 2 so-so days and 1 "train wreck" day. I struggled with trim - floaty feet in particular, back-kick as well as buoyancy control, especially on ascents.

Executive overview:
- PADI grad with 3 years and 48 dives as a vacation diver. 30 of those dives in BP/W + long hose wo/ mentoring.
- 15 dives in drysuit, 11 of those spent training for Fundies, doing what we could to emulate internet videos of trim and kicks.
- got a Fundies Rec pass after an additional day of practising specific skills and of course another Eval dive.

I'm no "wunderkind" by any stretch, and I also don't think my training timeline illustrates a "Fairytale" or "Reverse Bragging". Others may judge differently ...?

I had a good time during Fundies. It was frustrating at times, but pretty much all of the frustration stemmed from my own unreasonable expectations as to my own performance. Edit: to echo John: My ego got in the way ...

Just a different perspective.

That said, I would have *loved* to have a back kick for Fundies, and will agree that Primer would be a good workshop to do before Fundies. I have since ~summer of 2010 recommended Primer as a 1st step.

Henrik

Henrik,

I was not thinking about you when I talked about the 'violin players'. Your detailed account is one of the most useful reality checks for someone contemplating to take the Fundies. You also confessed to "11 of those spent training for Fundies, doing what we could to emulate internet videos of trim and kicks". While there is a risk to practice much without proper guidance it should be obvious by now that without practice one would have to take a Fundies course that offers no practice between sessions as a no-grade eye opener.

Also, there is the "ego got in the way" and "just walk in with an open mind and enjoy" theme again. This may be a recipe to have fun in Fundies but as soon as failures are introduced this is not going to cut it anymore.

All 'monster' divers I met so far have self confidence sufficient for multiple common folks. They may not show it blatantly to the outside as ego but it ultimately gives them the ability to prevail. Ed Hayes put it nicely "Don't get frustrated, get <expletive> mad and get <expletive> even."

I am almost through the "mad" phase waiting for the opening of Dutch to "get even" - with myself.

 

[HenrikBP]

However, there is the "ego got in the way" and "just walk in with an open mind and enjoy" theme again. This may be a recipe to have fun in Fundies but as soon as failures are introduced this is not going to cut it anymore.

I may misunderstand what you wrote, but I saw the air share and maskless drills as practice or precursors to "real" failure drills later on in training?

I know that *for me* my ego really *is* a big hindrance to how well I perform. I know from MC racing, Scuba and other skills based activities, that if I can Smile, Breathe and Relax, I do *so* much better, than when I get frustrated and tense up.

Henrik

 

[HenrikBP]

You also confessed to "11 of those spent training for Fundies, doing what we could to emulate internet videos of trim and kicks". While there is a risk to practice much without proper guidance it should be obvious by now that without practice one would have to take a Fundies course that offers no practice between sessions as a no-grade eye opener.

Let me paint a more accurate picture of the practice we did:

- drop to the platform and swim around along the perimeter. Occasionally "ask" someone in the group "how does this look?" and get an "OK" in reply. "same platform same time" type dives if you will.

- none of us knew details of what to look for. You can argue that trim is trim, but none of us realized that they really do mean "Horizontal" when the standards say horizontal

- as for our kick "reviews", well if it looked somewhat like what we remembered from the videos, it was probably ok.

I'm not saying that we went in without preparation - 'cause obviously we didn't. And I spent a lot of time and effort on getting my weighting as well as trim weight location right, and it was a huge help not having to struggle with that.

But, our preparation would have been *so* much more effective if we had already been introduced to the correct details of how these skills should be performed.

Henrik

 

[Lobzilla]

Let me paint a more accurate picture of the practice we did:

- drop to the platform and swim around along the perimeter. Occasionally "ask" someone in the group "how does this look?" and get an "OK" in reply. "same platform same time" type dives if you will.

- none of us knew details of what to look for. You can argue that trim is trim, but none of us realized that they really do mean "Horizontal" when the standards say horizontal

- as for our kick "reviews", well if it looked somewhat like what we remembered from the videos, it was probably ok.

I'm not saying that we went in without preparation - 'cause obviously we didn't. And I spent a lot of time and effort on getting my weighting as well as trim weight location right, and it was a huge help not having to struggle with that.

But, our preparation would have been *so* much more effective if we had already been introduced to the correct details of how these skills should be performed.

Henrik

Exactly, that's why the better way to take and pass Fundies would be either in two blocks (Block1: skills demo and initial trials - Practice as team - Block 2: Tweaking and eval) or as a continuous class with preparation in primer and/or through skilled GUE divers.

 

[Scott L]

Gareth,
Maybe you are teaching a different Fundoes class than they teach here. For you to dismiss the hell week anology so aggressively, is wrong.

The original idea of taking DIR out to the masses ( beyond the WKPP) was important, because we wanted to get common sense diving ideas and better skills out to divers worldwide. GUE was a spectacular advancement of the goal. But if you take the tremendous body of knowledge and skills GUE represents. offer this as a carrot, and then make a one week class so demanding that students are almost breaking down by the end of it---what resemblance does this result have with the original goal?
You want to say the "hell week" name tag is bogus. I don't think that is for you to say...I think the past students of Fundies courses are the ones who should answer this. I've talked to enough past fundies students to know.... it is your attitude that needs fixing.
Going through Fundies SHOULD be fun. Diving should be fun. The hundreds of deep tech dives I did With George Irvine and Bill Mee back in the mid to late nineties were always fun, and we did dives that would scare the cr%p out of most tech divers today. New people we took on and mentored into doing these deep dive sites would never have complained about skill preformance anxiety...

I stand by my earlier post---there needs to be a class preceeding it. Let's take this to private message rather than escalating this here.


My real point to this pre-requisite course idea, DOES NOT require GUE to make any changes ( although I happen to think this would be good)....All that really needs to happen is for all of the Fundies graduates to begin telling their peers and divers interested in Fundies, they SHOULD ABSOLUTELY TAKE THE PRIMER COURSE FIRST.

For anyone living in Florida who wishes to pursue GUE-F, Errol Kalayci along with Dan Volker work tirelessly with candidates w/pre-class training/orientation sessions. IMHO, they have the winning formula down pat...

 

[Gareth]

Exactly, that's why the better way to take and pass Fundies would be either in two blocks (Block1: skills demo and initial trials - Practice as team - Block 2: Tweaking and eval) or as a continuous class with preparation in primer and/or through skilled GUE divers.

There's nothing stopping people from approaching fundies as it exists now with this mindset. You can get a rec or even a provisional, go away and practice, and then come back a few months later for an assessment. Your instructor should give you direction and a roadmap on how to improve. Then you came back and see how you have got on. If it's me, they don't even pay for the reassessment so they get 4 days + another couple of dives.

This structure is exactly what we have now. Unfortunately, people get hung up on getting a pass at the end of the 4 day period.

 

[MarkJS]

From what I have seen, I think what needs to happen is that the Primer class must be completed first.....both as a rating tool for judging who would be able to move on to fundies and who would have lots of work to do....and for providing each diver with a knowledge of what skillset they need to work on. Personally, I think FUNDIES would be more fun for people if they had the chance to practice essential skills for weeks or months prior to FUNDIES.

or perhaps something like "GUE essentials". Or maybe "GUE Fundamentals"

hey ! wait a minute....

GUE Fundamentals is supposed to be a no stress course. It is not the instructors job to add any stress to the student on the course. It is, in fact, the instructors job to REMOVE the stress that the students bring with them because they read nonsense like "HELL WEEK" on the internet.

As a recent fundamentals graduate, I'd have to disagree with a requirement to take yet another course prior to fundamentals. Fundies was introduced because divers enrolling on GUE tech & cave courses lacked the basic skills, necessary to build upon, to develop the further skills for the new environment and challenges they wished to experience. Fundies is, therefore, the entry-level course.

It's important for divers to be honest with themselves about their expectations from such a course; I went into fundies with 19 years and several thousand dives under my belt, much of it teaching at a, so called, 'technical level' and expected a tech pass with little difficulty. I was interested in how the course structure operated and I enjoy dealing with new instructors and cherry-picking whatever I consider to be a good teaching technique. One of my team mates had 9 years of bad habits and very little recent diving history; he came out of the course with a provisional and a huge grin combined with a full skillset of tools to help him develop his diving further before resubmitting himself for evaluation for a rec/tec pass, should he choose to do so. His diving has been completely rejuvenated; he had been talking for months about throwing in the towel and selling all his kit, now he understands that there is so much more that he can develop and he has decided to take up that challenge.
Who got most from the course?

There are hundreds of threads on internet forums asking what preparation should be done prior to fundies and a tag-team of GUE qualified divers say 'do nothing, just dive, you'll only learn bad habits'. While essentially true, the question should be answered with another question; what do you want from the course? If it's just a pass to gain entry to a cave or tech course then you need to dive lots and have your buoyancy, trim and equipment management (light cords, valve skills, etc) up to scratch as there simply isn't time to turn an inexperienced diver with poor overall skills into a diver capable of undertaking further 'advanced-level' training soon afterwards.

If, however, you are looking to gain the tools and techniques to further your diving in the future and you're willing to work at developing these skills then you'll come out of the course a much better diver, whether you go back to earn your tech pass or not. I'll be sending my partner on fundies soon; she's an AOW with around 40 dives under her belt. Will she get a tech pass? I doubt it but she'll be a far more competent diver afterwards.

Cheers
Mark

 

[GShockey]

Guy,

I understand how the survey system currently works. But the surveys missed the entirety of my class and the entirety of Jax’s class as well. Working with this pretty limited sample it appears you are not getting inputs from a lot people. Something to consider is that some of the potentially more useful inputs are being systematically excluded. Doing that does create a skewed view of how the classes perform. The essence of QA is to document issues and then resolve them. If the first step is skipped the second is not likely to follow.
.

First off, thank you for your comments in the latter part of your post, but I would still like to address the first paragraph I quoted above:

How do you suggest we get input from people who have no requirement to provide it? Why did you or your group or the other group not provide feedback via the QA form? You have/had the opportunity to help correct the very things you feel need correcting but you chose not to. How do you suggest we make it mandatory for feedback? This is a sincere question and not intended as sarcasm, and as one of the only two GUE instructors sitting on the Quality Assurance board, I can assure you that if you have a good idea for this, I will forward it to the Chairman and the entire QA board will examine your idea closely.

Best,

Guy