Why dive in a quarry? Should you log them

[HantsDiver]

It doesn't. How they express that opinion to others - and especially strangers, in a public forum - has a very direct relationship to the perception of professionalism.

"I don't really care for that myself" comes across as much more professional than "that is total rubbish." In my opinion, anyway.

The agencies that I am familiar with have a code of conduct that must be accepted in order to receive a professional certification.

I agree with you about perception. And I could have worded that better. It was an off the cuff remark.

I'm still interested in hearing when I made certain statements. I'm the sort of person who will admit when I'm wrong, and am happy to learn. However, I think people should do the same if they are unable to support their assertions.

If you truly think I've overstepped the mark shoot me a pm and I'll send the relevant information for you to report to whichever agency is appropriate.

 

[Lorenzoid]

Blanket statements--or statements that reasonably can be interpreted as blanket statements--tend to draw replies from people who see them as challenges. People respond to the challenge by noting at least one exception to the statement. A statement that further training is always needed before a diver trained in a quarry can safely dive in any ocean was challenged by people pointing out exceptions. The "always" and "any" could be read as implicit in the statement.

Merely prefacing a blanket statement with "In my opinion" doesn't often stave off the challengers. "In my opinion" might be seen as boilerplate that could just as well be added to every statement in every SB discussion.

It's easy to avoid blanket statements and the inevitable challenges by qualifying a statement with "some," "in some cases," etc.: It may be beneficial to some divers who were trained in some quarries to obtain further training before diving in some ocean environments. It may be beneficial to some divers who were trained in some ocean environments to obtain further training before diving in some quarries.

 

[Doby45]

It's easy to avoid blanket statements and the inevitable challenges by qualifying a statement with "some," "in some cases," etc.: It may be beneficial to some divers who were trained in some quarries to obtain further training before diving in some ocean environments. It may be beneficial to some divers who were trained in some ocean environments to obtain further training before diving in some quarries.

Well you noticed as the discussion has gone further and further that he is NOW, prefacing his statement with the "current and surge" aspect of "sea" diving. In doing so he is doing exactly what you are stating he should have done from the get go. But, the original statement/sentiment was that anything other than "sea" diving was not worth counting as a dive.

 

[HantsDiver]

Well you noticed as the discussion has gone further and further that he is NOW, prefacing his statement with the "current and surge" aspect of "sea" diving. In doing so he is doing exactly what you are stating he should have done from the get go. But, the original statement/sentiment was that anything other than "sea" diving was not worth counting as a dive.

I would like an apology, please. I first discussed this in post 133 on page 14. Here is what I actually said with bolded added for emphasis:

You should count or log anything you want. Log pool dives if you want. What counts as an open water dive is only valid during training. After that do whatever you want. My friend brought a new rebreather and got it set up and was adjusting trim weights in the pool - so he wrote this down. There are no rules on what you can write down.

The bit in bold. If you are trained in warm waters in the sea it would be an idea to get some training before jumping into a cold quarry. You'd want to know about thermal protection, alternative air sources and how to minimize the risk of freeflows. Which is what I did for my fiance who had done all her diving in tropical waters. I helped her pick a drysuit and then went diving with her and even taught her a couple of courses to feel comfortable in the conditions.

However, if you have dived in the sea in similar conditions to the quarry there is no need to take further training as quarries are simpler and less challenging dives than the sea*. Which is why I got my fiance to get comfortable with the equipment in a quarry before going off a boat and down onto a wreck, which she will be doing this weekend.

*That's going to upset some people but it's true. There is a reason that training is done in quarries - it's because you know what you will be getting and it's not as challenging. That does not diminish from quarry diving, and if you enjoy doing it then continue happily. Diving does not have to be challenging to be fun (my favorite dives are the chilled out ones in lovely clear warm water).

You have either intentionally or unintentionally taken my comments out of context and I would like you to address this.

@Lorenzoid can I ask if you were referring to me with reference to blanket statements? As you can see my post clearly says the same thing as you in reference to getting training to quarries if you are not cold water trained and contains no blanket statements.

 

[stuartv]

I agree with you about perception. And I could have worded that better. It was an off the cuff remark.

I'm still interested in hearing when I made certain statements. I'm the sort of person who will admit when I'm wrong, and am happy to learn. However, I think people should do the same if they are unable to support their assertions.

If you truly think I've overstepped the mark shoot me a pm and I'll send the relevant information for you to report to whichever agency is appropriate.

I don't have any beef with what you said. When I read it, I personally took it as banter, not an attack.

Here, I was just answering the questions you asked in that last post. You're acting as if nobody had any cause whatsoever to take umbrage with what you said. Even though I personally didn't, if you are indeed a certified dive professional, it is my impression that you have probably expressed a commitment (to your agency) to behave in a way that is different than what us non-pros are obligated to. And in that case, what you posted may not be seen by some people and some dive certification agencies as meeting the obligation that you took on when you accepted a pro license. I have been doing SDI DM training and part of that has included what boils down to "be positive, don't be negative", and what you said can CERTAINLY be construed as being negative about a certain type of diving.

Like I said, I didn't have issue with it personally, and I'm not (yet) a dive pro myself. So, this is just my personal opinion.

 

[Doby45]

I would like an apology, please.

There will be none given as there has been no slight to apologize for. Below is the list you have asked for as to YOUR statements.

Quarries are total rubbish

Unless you have no chance of getting into the sea I think you'd need your head checking if you chose to dive in them

I'm yet to meet anyone who chooses to dive in quarries out of choice. They are second choice and second rate.

So to clarify if I train someone in a quarry I'll tell them they have no place in the ocean

quarries are simpler and less challenging dives than the sea

I'm not knocking quarries here. I'm saying that they do not prepare people to dive in strong surge and currents

Your last quote here was as you were back peddling to whole innuendo of the discussion and basically saying "Hey what I really meant was surge and currents." Kudos to you for that.

 

[Lorenzoid]

. . . @Lorenzoid can I ask if you were referring to me with reference to blanket statements? As you can see my post clearly says the same thing as you in reference to getting training to quarries if you are not cold water trained and contains no blanket statements.

Yes, and I apologize if I misinterpreted your first statement about it as a blanket statement. I'm not going to search for it, but that was my interpretation of it. As I recall, in a later statement you qualified it with "UK sea."

 

[HantsDiver]

There will be none given as there has been no slight to apologize for. Below is the list you have asked for as to YOUR statements.

Your last quote here was as you were back peddling to whole innuendo of the discussion and basically saying "Hey what I really meant was surge and currents." Kudos to you for that.

If you need to use snippets out of context that is your call. I'd still question where I have ever said that only sea diving was worthy of counting as a logged dive? Especially as I said... well completely the opposite.

Yes, and I apologize if I misinterpreted your first statement about it as a blanket statement. I'm not going to search for it, but that was my interpretation of it. As I recall, in a later statement you qualified it with "UK sea."

I did mention that it was relevant for UK sea diving - however, my very first post in reference to this said people should get trained for quarry diving if they had only warm water experience. I'm not really sure how much more balanced I could be.

 

[Doby45]

If you need to use snippets out of context that is your call. I'd still question where I have ever said that only sea diving was worthy of counting as a logged dive? Especially as I said... well completely the opposite.

If what I stated in my post was not the exact intent that the "rest" of the board took from your statements, I would ask why there has been so much hoopla surrounding this discussion and specifically your statements. And yes, I know you have attempted to qualify your original statements numerous times, but that is more like a child saying they are sorry, simply because they got caught.

 

[HantsDiver]

If what I stated in my post was not the exact intent that the "rest" of the board took from your statements, I would ask why there has been so much hoopla surrounding this discussion and specifically your statements. And yes, I know you have attempted to qualify your original statements numerous times, but that is more like a child saying they are sorry, simply because they got caught.

I can't comment on what anyone else is thinking. I'm asking how you came to the conclusion that I have said: "that anything other than "sea" diving was not worth counting as a dive"? When I clearly said the exact opposite.

You're entitled to disagree with what I have said - but to falsely accuse me of saying things I have not isn't on. When presented with this you seem to not understand that disagreeing with one thing I've said doesn't allow you to say I've said something else.

How was I caught? I've quoted my original statement about if quarry diving qualifies you to dive in the sea and vice versa. The only thing I've said is that I could have worded something differently. I really cannot for the life of me understand how a grown adult is getting so upset about this.