PADI vs NAUI

[vladimir]

Personally, I don't see how getting them in the water on Scuba under any program can be sub-optimal. I get the idea that a lot of you think the oceans are too crowded and you want to keep the riff raff out. I know that I don't feel that way at all. I am excited for others to discover Scuba and the wonders underneath the surface of the ocean. I want remove barriers: not construct them.

This is a pretty good effort at spin, Pete. Like politicians do. Instead of actually addressing the question at hand, they cast themselves as men of the people, their opponents as elitists, and sidestep the issue. An example of sub-optimal training would be any that puts divers in the water before they are competent enough to enjoy the experience safely and without undue stress. As you know.

BTW, I have a hard time calling diving a sport.

Me too. But the expansive definition of "sport" in most dictionaries doesn't bear out our impressions. What is interesting to me, based on prior discussions here, is that the definition of the word seems to have expanded in tandem with the population's waistlines to include physically less-demanding pursuits.

 

[endurodog]

This is a pretty good effort at spin, Pete. Like politicians do. Instead of actually addressing the question at hand, they cast themselves as men of the people, their opponents as elitists, and sidestep the issue. An example of sub-optimal training would be any that puts divers in the water before they are competent enough to enjoy the experience safely and without undue stress. As you know.

.

This is really the root of this and other debates on here. Some don't feel you accomplish this in the shorter courses offered by NAUI and PADI mainly (and other orgs too). The reason this is going is because some believe that this puts divers in the water that are not ready. I believe that if taught correctly that the shorter courses deliver on this objective for most that take them.

 

[The Chairman]

This is a pretty good effort at spin, Pete. Like politicians do.

Again, what am I spinning? Are you suggesting that a predominate amount of dives are "not fun" or uncomfortable? How did you arrive at this particular metric? I bet it came from www.pullthemetricsoutofmyass.com.

 

[vladimir]

Again, what am I spinning? Are you suggesting that a predominant amount of dives are "not fun" or uncomfortable? How did you arrive at this particular metric? I bet it came from www.pullthemetricsoutofmyass.com.

No, I suggested nothing of the kind, actually. That is more spin, where you respond to things I didn't say in an attempt to frame the argument. What I said was:

At the OW level, I doubt most aspiring divers do much to differentiate between classes beyond determining what is convenient and what is cheap. Of course, cheap and convenient suits just about everybody, all other things being equal. But the aspiring diver has little incentive to even investigate those other things, because they are probably ignorant of their import or even of their existence. So what suits them in the short run may be sub-optimal in the long run. Kind of like eating at McDonalds.

That means exactly what it says--no more. Do you think most aspiring divers do a lot to differentiate between classes on the basis of factors besides cost and convenience? I doubt it. I would be interested in hearing any evidence you have to contradict my view. Do you think most aspiring divers are aware of the factors that differentiate high-quality training (however you want to define it) from low-quality training? Do you think they are able to differentiate between a good instructor and a poor instructor before they commit to training? I doubt it, but would be interested in hearing your evidence to contradict my view.

Personally, I don't see how getting them in the water on Scuba under any program can be sub-optimal.

Of course you can imagine inadequately trained divers placed in challenging conditions and getting spooked, for example. I have first-hand experience of such an instance, when I dived with my ex-wife after her one-day Discover Scuba (or similar--not sure they called it that in 1987) course in Kauai. It took her a few years before she attempted to dive again. She became a competent diver, but her original training was sub-optimal. She (and I) did not differentiate between training alternatives--we opted for what was convenient. I believe there are quite a few anecdotes that bear out my wife's experience right here on the Scubaboard.

I get the idea that a lot of you think the oceans are too crowded and you want to keep the riff raff out. I know that I don't feel that way at all. I am excited for others to discover Scuba and the wonders underneath the surface of the ocean. I want remove barriers: not construct them.

This is spin. You are a man of the people; your opponents are elitists. What are you running for?

 

[Clammy]

Me too. But the expansive definition of "sport" in most dictionaries doesn't bear out our impressions. What is interesting to me, based on prior discussions here, is that the definition of the word seems to have expanded in tandem with the population's waistlines to include physically less-demanding pursuits.

Well there is still no real competitive aspect outside of peoples egos. Poker is a "mental sport" but there is still a clear objective means to judge ability in direct competition to someone else. Maybe we should create a sport. Let's start with... Competitive SCUBA: Buoyancy control. Divers must stay between 2 vertical and 2 horizontal points while task loading at an increasingly difficult rate. The one that can survive for the longest time wins but the tasks get loaded at predetermined intervals, penalty for skipping, dropping, or not finishing a task. Bonus for finishing earlier and moving on! ha ha! Next category, SAC rate by weight class! HA HA! Cave navigation with silt out and black out. Survive to win! Quickest ascent with deco WITHOUT getting bent! Again, survive to win!

 

[vladimir]

Here's the problem, Clammy:

sport   /spɔrt, spoʊrt/ Show Spelled
[spawrt, spohrt] Show IPA

–noun
1. an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc.
2. a particular form of this, especially in the out of doors.
3. diversion; recreation; pleasant pastime.

You and I are thinking of definition 1. Those who disagree with us will cite definition 3, which would include knitting, Xbox, and scuba diving, among many, many others.

 

[The Chairman]

No, I suggested nothing of the kind, actually. That is more spin,

You actually also said this:

An example of sub-optimal training would be any that puts divers in the water before they are competent enough to enjoy the experience safely and without undue stress.

I have re-couched this using "not fun or uncomfortable". There is no spin, unless of course to you, spin is anything that exposes your logical fallacies. That probably explains your preoccupation with spin.

I made the point that the long drawn out courses kept me from getting certified for YEARS. I asked Thal if this was a good thing. He indicated that it was since I was possibly not ready to get certified. To which I pointed out that ANY type of instruction would have been better than NO instruction. You have brought up your ex's experience, and how she took a resort course (which is a strawman, since we are not discussing resort courses). Would she have been LESS terrified if there had been NO instruction? One would suspect so. You have failed to show that the fault was the course or the instructor. My bet is on the latter. Who's twisting what here? Don't blame me if I keep bringing things back to topic.

Now you bring up your role as a consumer in dive training. I'm sorry, but if YOU didn't do the research: it's simply not my or the Scuba Industry's fault. If your course(s) were taken after 2000, then I would suggest that there was a lot of info RIGHT HERE to tell you to avoid a resort course. Your bad for not finding it. But there is a deeper question: why don't a good number of Dive Shops offer these looooong courses? Why do they offer the short course almost exclusively? For the same reason I didn't take one when it was offered to me back in the 70's: I didn't have the time or the money!!! Why would a shop offer something that they just can't sell? Like I said earlier, this course has some serious flaws and they have nothing to do with content.

If you haven't figured this out yet: Diving is all about limits. Depth/time/gas/temperature/experience/strength/training/comfort and more should be factored in on every dive. If a diver goes beyond their limits then they should be a little nervous. They might even have a "sub-optimal" dive. What does this have to do with the agency? Nothing, nada and squat. It has everything to do with the diver and it might reflect on how they were taught by an instructor.

Speaking of spin... your over use of the word sub-optimal is just that. Who decides what is optimal? Sure, it might make you sound "all that", but it's a tired phrase from the DIR wars of the 90's. In reality, all courses have flaws in both design and delivery. Ergo, all courses are sub-optimal as are all divers and all gear. That goes for your use of the word spin too. Stop attacking me, and address the points I have made. If you haven't been paying attention, I contend that a short course is better than no course. I also contend that the long course has been rejected by most of the industry as well as the consumers. As for the differences between PADI and NAUI, they are mostly political. You can get the same level of training from either and the quality depends mostly on your instructor. Great instructors work for all agencies and if you aren't certified yet, you're really missing out on a lot of fun.

 

[Pseudocyber]

Hi guys,

I recently took a PADI rescue course, and it was my first time in colder water (I'm a WWW). At 30', the water in the quarry got down to 59 degrees F. I was diving my 3mm merino lined first, then later added gloves and hood.

Point is, after diving I was discussing the water temp with the instructor and he kind of grimaced and admitted he couldn't call it "cold" because he was teaching a PADI course, and instead had to call it "refreshing". :shocked2: This sort of spin came out a couple of times in the course, when there was clear marketing/politically correct speech in the course instead of being frank and honest about topics such as temperature, stress, panic, emergencies, etc.

He said if it was ... I forget ... maybe SSI ... he could call 59 degrees cold. :cold:

Without experiencing it - it appears that some agencies are more geared to "sales" - getting people signed up and taking classes - and others are more "technically" inclined - not necessarily just teaching "technical diving" but teaching more of the technical reasons why and how.

Eventually, I plan on continuing my SCUBA education with a different agency.

PC

 

[vladimir]

You actually also said this:

I have re-couched this using "not fun or uncomfortable". There is no spin, unless of course to you, spin is anything that exposes your logical fallacies. That probably explains your preoccupation with spin.

I made the point that the long drawn out courses kept me from getting certified for YEARS. I asked Thal if this was a good thing. He indicated that it was since I was possibly not ready to get certified. To which I pointed out that ANY type of instruction would have been better than NO instruction. You have brought up your ex's experience, and how she took a resort course (which is a strawman, since we are not discussing resort courses). Would she have been LESS terrified if there had been NO instruction? One would suspect so. You have failed to show that the fault was the course or the instructor. My bet is on the latter. Who's twisting what here? Don't blame me if I keep bringing things back to topic.

Now you bring up your role as a consumer in dive training. I'm sorry, but if YOU didn't do the research: it's simply not my or the Scuba Industry's fault. If your course(s) were taken after 2000, then I would suggest that there was a lot of info RIGHT HERE to tell you to avoid a resort course. Your bad for not finding it. But there is a deeper question: why don't a good number of Dive Shops offer these looooong courses? Why do they offer the short course almost exclusively? For the same reason I didn't take one when it was offered to me back in the 70's: I didn't have the time or the money!!! Why would a shop offer something that they just can't sell? Like I said earlier, this course has some serious flaws and they have nothing to do with content.

If you haven't figured this out yet: Diving is all about limits. Depth/time/gas/temperature/experience/strength/training/comfort and more should be factored in on every dive. If a diver goes beyond their limits then they should be a little nervous. They might even have a "sub-optimal" dive. What does this have to do with the agency? Nothing, nada and squat. It has everything to do with the diver and it might reflect on how they were taught by an instructor.

Speaking of spin... your over use of the word sub-optimal is just that. Who decides what is optimal? Sure, it might make you sound "all that", but it's a tired phrase from the DIR wars of the 90's. In reality, all courses have flaws in both design and delivery. Ergo, all courses are sub-optimal as are all divers and all gear. That goes for your use of the word spin too. Stop attacking me, and address the points I have made. If you haven't been paying attention, I contend that a short course is better than no course. I also contend that the long course has been rejected by most of the industry as well as the consumers. As for the differences between PADI and NAUI, they are mostly political. You can get the same level of training from either and the quality depends mostly on your instructor. Great instructors work for all agencies and if you aren't certified yet, you're really missing out on a lot of fun.

I don't have the patience for one of these multi-quote fests that you and Thal have to sift through this. I made a narrow claim: that I doubted people shopping for training differentiated well between the options. Because they don't know what criteria to use. (I hope "criteria" isn't too "all that" for you.) I didn't say that you needed 100 hours of training, or 50, or 20. I didn't say that the training you provide, or PADI instructors in general provide, was inadequate. I only suggested that ignorance "may" (qualified statement) lead new divers to choose sub-optimal training. (By the way, I chose the term sub-optimal to avoid suggesting that courses were unsafe or inadequate, not to spin anything. Again, I made a very limited claim.)

Perhaps because you were conducting similar arguments in this and another thread, you seem to have interpreted my narrow claim as a sign that I had joined Thalassamania and every claim he ever made, and decided to take your arguments with him and have them with me. If I had to choose a side...well, I didn't. He is much better qualified to make his arguments than I am. I am happy to defend and argue the small point that I made, but you have expanded that to a number of points I did not make and will not defend.

 

[Brendon]

Um... so this PARTICULAR thread/debate on naui vs padi started 8 YEARS AGO?!?! I wonder of the OP ever came to a decision.

BTW, I have a hard time calling diving a sport. I run marathons, ultra marathons, and triathlons (run, bike, swim) and those I call sports as well as hobbies. Sport and hobby don't have to be mutually exclusive however not all hobbies are really sports. SCUBA Diving, while requiring skill, and some organization and commitment lacks any sort of actual competition outside of people's heads, winners chosen in an OBJECTIVE manner, and as far as athleticism goes... well there are probably a few hundred threads here on the board about the general physical fitness of your average diver. I did say I have a HARD time, not that I wouldn't at all given what we call sports now-a-days.

Right like, Billards, Curling.... I dont believe competition is a requirement to be a sport as the definition would state there are exceptions. Otherwise you would be forced to include Rock,Paper,Scissors which holds tournaments through out the USA and a few other countries... With that said by definition running, swimming & biking dont really fit the football, basketball version of the sport definition. Which gives me the conclusion that golf is more of a sport by definition then your triatholon... I guess what I should have said was the difference I see alot is, the individual diver seeing this as a sport or hobby. There is a difference. For me it is Sport/Work... Thats not a hobby by definition.