Anthony's Key Resort, Roatan
Kevin Rutterford
in February next year and would appreciate any comments/tips!
Thanks
Daniel Kessler
Anthony's Key Resort is the only resort I've ever seen in the Caribbean that
looked like the South Seas. A pretty place and some good diving around
there...but they had this idoiotic policy at the time -- making experienced
certified divers go through a beginners routine -- I thought it was demeaning
at the time. They insisted that you go down in the water -- take off your
face mask and put it back on and clear it.
I wonder if they are still "carrying on" like that? However, it could be [at
the time] that they were attracting inexperienced divers and were trying to
"play it safe" ...who knows?
Dillon Pyron
>are they still around? I spent a week diving there years ago.
>
>Anthony's Key Resort is the only resort I've ever seen in the Caribbean that
>looked like the South Seas. A pretty place and some good diving around
>there...but they had this idoiotic policy at the time -- making experienced
>certified divers go through a beginners routine -- I thought it was demeaning
>at the time. They insisted that you go down in the water -- take off your
>face mask and put it back on and clear it.
CoCo View did that last time we were there, but that was before they
changed hands.
I've seen lots of places ask for log books. Which is the only reason
I keep one these days.
>
>I wonder if they are still "carrying on" like that? However, it could be [at
>the time] that they were attracting inexperienced divers and were trying to
>"play it safe" ...who knows?
>
>Kevin Rutterford wrote:
>
>> Any one have any experience of AKR in Roatan - we are thinking of visiting
>> in February next year and would appreciate any comments/tips!
>>
>> Thanks
--
dillon
If you can't figure out how to unmunge my
address, email me and I'll explain it.
Greg Mossman
news:4534D7E1...@pop.cybernex.net...
> are they still around? I spent a week diving there years ago.
>
> Anthony's Key Resort is the only resort I've ever seen in the Caribbean
> that
> looked like the South Seas. A pretty place and some good diving around
> there...but they had this idoiotic policy at the time -- making
> experienced
> certified divers go through a beginners routine -- I thought it was
> demeaning
> at the time. They insisted that you go down in the water -- take off your
> face mask and put it back on and clear it.
I haven't stayed there, but when I was practically "next door" at BIBR, we
drove through Anthony's every day on the way to the dive sites. I can
definitely state that it doesn't look like the South Seas, whatever those
are. They had an entire marina of dive boats and lots and lots of rooms.
It seemed very busy and crowded.
Daniel Kessler
Greg Mossman wrote: I can definitely state that it doesn't look like the South
Seas, whatever those
> are.
and where in the South Seas have you dived? Tahiti, Fiji, Tonga or Vanuatu
perhaps. The curious want to know.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
>
> Anthony's Key Resort is the only resort I've ever seen in the Caribbean
> that
> looked like the South Seas. A pretty place and some good diving around
> there...but they had this idoiotic policy at the time -- making
> experienced
> certified divers go through a beginners routine -- I thought it was
> demeaning
> at the time. They insisted that you go down in the water -- take off your
> face mask and put it back on and clear it.
Well, I have over a thousand dives, how many do you have?
Maybe 700 of mine are solo.
Many of mine are in zero visibility or in near freezing water.
Overhead.
If some other, you know, -vacation diver- dies on your dive,
Your diving day (at least one) will be ruined.
Be humble, and thankful, that they check.
That's what makes a -safe-, and -professional-, operation.
If -I- don't mind, and I don't, why should you?
> I wonder if they are still "carrying on" like that?
Because they know the type?
GWB
<Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
> Many of mine are in zero visibility or in near freezing water.
Damn, that sounds like fun!
(no wonder you were solo.) <G>
Lee Bell
> If some other, you know, -vacation diver- dies on your dive,
> Your diving day (at least one) will be ruined.
> Be humble, and thankful, that they check.
No need to check. PADI certified divers are all safe enough. So is everyone
certified by other agencies. Otherwise, the bodies would be stacking up all
over the place, and they're not.
chilly
"Lee Bell" <plee...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:45gZg.62275$KR1....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
:^)
chilly
Yes and have a very good reputation as well . . for tourist divers that like
an all-inclusive.
> Anthony's Key Resort is the only resort I've ever seen in the Caribbean
that
> looked like the South Seas. A pretty place and some good diving around
> there...but they had this idoiotic policy at the time -- making
experienced
> certified divers go through a beginners routine -- I thought it was
demeaning
> at the time. They insisted that you go down in the water -- take off your
> face mask and put it back on and clear it.
I don't like to get called on for that, but I sure do like for some others
I've seen have to do it. That being the case, I'll suck it up when called
upon.
> I wonder if they are still "carrying on" like that? However, it could be
[at
> the time] that they were attracting inexperienced divers and were trying
to
> "play it safe" ...who knows?
Safety . .hmm. . . hopefully, this particular requirement goes hand in hand
with oxygen on the boat, etc. And in that regard, Anthony's has the
chamber, the only chamber on the island. Of course, anyone that needs it
has access no matter who they dive with.
Lee Bell
>> . . . but they had this idoiotic policy at the time -- making experienced
>> certified divers go through a beginners routine -- I thought
>> it was demeaning at the time. They insisted that you go down in the
>> water -- take off your face mask and put it back on and
>> clear it.
> I don't like to get called on for that, but I sure do like for some others
> I've seen have to do it. That being the case, I'll suck it up when called
> upon.
I don't have a particular problem with resorts that find a way to assess the
diving ability of their guests. I must admit, however, that testing
someone's ability to clear their mask seems to be pushing things a bit far.
That seems a bit basic and, if there actually are certified divers out there
that can't perform this simple skill reliably, I would suggest that my
previous comments about the quality of dive training were more accurate that
even I thought.
Personally, I like the way they did things at Sunset House on Grand Cayman.
All new arrivals go out on the same boat to a very nice, but quite shallow
reef. The boat has a higher DM to guest ratio than their other boats.
While everybody is diving, the DMs are assessing skills. The next day,
divers go out on the regular boats, descretely divided among them on the
basis of the first day's assessment. You have to be paying attention to
even notice the selection. It takes a bit more effort, and a bit more skill
on the part of the resort staff, but it accomplishes the same thing without
demeaning anyone.
Lee
Daniel Kessler
>
> one that had hoses that passed around both sides of your head.
Those were the days!
Mick Whittingham
<dkes...@pop.cybernex.net> writes
team convinced the school to pay for SCUBA lessons. I think the BSAC
group that were conned into teaching us were the New Cross BSAC at 'The
Peckham Health Baths' and at school after lessons with teachers for the
non 'in water' bits. I ended up with some thing called a '3rd class
diver certificate' in 1963 but after I left school and joined the
underpaid apprentices group of a local company and I didn't dive for
years.
I tried emailing the New Cross lot recently to see if they had any
records of me but never had a reply. Most BSAC members look at me blank
when I refer to a 3rd class cert.
If I remember correctly it was 3rd., 2nd., 1st. And instructor or some
thing on those lines. Anyone else old enough to remember?
I used PADI when I restarted.
--
Mick Whittingham
'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.'
William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2.
Greg Mossman
>
> and where in the South Seas have you dived? Tahiti, Fiji, Tonga or
> Vanuatu
> perhaps. The curious want to know.
Moorea and several of the Tuamotus, and I've seen plenty of photos and video
from various Fijian islands.
chilly
> chilly wrote
>
> > I don't like to get called on for that, but I sure do like for some
others
> > I've seen have to do it. That being the case, I'll suck it up when
called
> > upon.
>
> I don't have a particular problem with resorts that find a way to assess
the
> diving ability of their guests. I must admit, however, that testing
> someone's ability to clear their mask seems to be pushing things a bit
far.
> That seems a bit basic and, if there actually are certified divers out
there
> that can't perform this simple skill reliably, I would suggest that my
> previous comments about the quality of dive training were more accurate
that
> even I thought.
:^)
> Personally, I like the way they did things at Sunset House on Grand
Cayman.
> All new arrivals go out on the same boat to a very nice, but quite shallow
> reef. The boat has a higher DM to guest ratio than their other boats.
> While everybody is diving, the DMs are assessing skills. The next day,
> divers go out on the regular boats, descretely divided among them on the
> basis of the first day's assessment. You have to be paying attention to
> even notice the selection. It takes a bit more effort, and a bit more
skill
> on the part of the resort staff, but it accomplishes the same thing
without
> demeaning anyone.
Not a bad plan.
I find that I have been prejudged any number of times. Lasts one dive and
after 2 . . well, I can generally get whatever I want, ie: no buddy.
Robert
As a lowly Rescue Diver I actually find it usefull to do a shallow
first dive, if not in water for a few months, even when I have had my
regs serviced just before leaving, it is allways a good equipment
check if nothing else, but checking mask replacement does seem a bit
far.
.
Vulcan Bomber (101 Squadron)
Daniel Kessler
Greg Mossman
> viewing videos don't count! You need to get out more.
Sure I do, but someone has to pay the bills. I spent two weeks in Indonesia
this year plus travel time, started off the new year in Honduras and I'll be
finishing the year in Amsterdam, plus I spent a week in Belize and a week in
Turks & Caicos on liveaboards, a short Mexico cruise on my birthday,
Carnival in Cozumel, Dive with Greg II in Florida, business trips in Chicago
and Atlanta, a few quick trips to Vegas, a weekend in Seattle coming up, and
a quick dive trip to Maui in December. I already have a week in Bonaire and
a 10-day liveaboard in the Galapagos planned for next year. Who has time
for the South Pacific?
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
Yeah, but sometimes those YMCA non-rates slide in. :-)
Chris Notton
ke...@rutterford.plus.net says...
> Any one have any experience of AKR in Roatan - we are thinking of visiting
> in February next year and would appreciate any comments/tips!
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
Roatan http://www.subwaywatersports.com/ They have three dive centres
there. She will give you the latest low-down & gossip on all the dive
op's & sites there without giving you the hard sell.
Pip pip
--
Chris Notton
Replace "nospam" with my surname to reply by email
Sostituisca il "nospam" con il mio cognome per rispondere
}<////(*>
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
news:JjCZg.157691$5R2.78255@pd7urf3no...
>
> "Lee Bell" <plee...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:PQoZg.15822$nn6....@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> chilly wrote
>>
>> > I don't like to get called on for that, but I sure do like for some
> others
>> > I've seen have to do it. That being the case, I'll suck it up when
> called
>> > upon.
>>
>> I don't have a particular problem with resorts that find a way to assess
> the
>> diving ability of their guests. I must admit, however, that testing
>> someone's ability to clear their mask seems to be pushing things a bit
> far.
>> That seems a bit basic and, if there actually are certified divers out
> there
>> that can't perform this simple skill reliably, I would suggest that my
>> previous comments about the quality of dive training were more accurate
> that
>> even I thought.
>
> :^)
Irreguardless of the fact there isn't a scrap of evidence to support the
premise.
:-)
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
>> Well, I have over a thousand dives, how many do you have?
>>
>> at least 2,500 ...certified back in the early 70's...my first regulator
>> was
>> one that had hoses that passed around both sides of your head.
I wouldn't think an experienced diver like yourself would find a "safety
first" attitude "demeaning".
I guess some pigs are more equal.
> Those were the days!
>
>
Lee Bell
>> No need to check. PADI certified divers are all safe enough. So is
>> everyone certified by other agencies. Otherwise, the bodies would be
>> stacking up all over the place, and they're not.
>
> Yeah, but sometimes those YMCA non-rates slide in. :-)
Even they are probably OK. Can't be sure. There aren't any bodies lying
around, but that may be because there are so few of them. Even if they're
not OK, eventually, they have to get a card from someone else, then they're
OK for sure. 8^)
Lee
Lee Bell
>>> I don't have a particular problem with resorts that find a way to assess
>> the
>>> diving ability of their guests. I must admit, however, that testing
>>> someone's ability to clear their mask seems to be pushing things a bit
>> far.
>>> That seems a bit basic and, if there actually are certified divers out
>> there
>>> that can't perform this simple skill reliably, I would suggest that my
>>> previous comments about the quality of dive training were more accurate
>> that
>>> even I thought.
>>
>> :^)
>
> Irreguardless of the fact there isn't a scrap of evidence to support the
> premise.
Sure there is. It's in this thread. A PADI facility that feels the need to
check to see if their agency's graduates know how to clear their masks. You
can't get more conclusive than that.
Lee
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
They just check the PADI divers, eh?
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
It's all a conspiracy. :-)
All the poorly trained dead divers are taken away in the dark green
helicopters.
Lee Bell
>>>>> I don't have a particular problem with resorts that find a way to
>>>>> assess
>>>>> the diving ability of their guests. I must admit, however, that
>>>>> testing
>>>>> someone's ability to clear their mask seems to be pushing things a bit
>>>>> far. That seems a bit basic and, if there actually are certified
>>>>> divers out
>>>>> there that can't perform this simple skill reliably, I would suggest
>>>>> that my
>>>>> previous comments about the quality of dive training were more
>>>>> accurate
>>>>> that even I thought.
>>> Irreguardless of the fact there isn't a scrap of evidence to support the
>>> premise.
>> Sure there is. It's in this thread. A PADI facility that feels the need
>> to check to see if their agency's graduates know how to clear their
>> masks. You can't get more conclusive than that.
> They just check the PADI divers, eh?
Do you see anywhere in this thread where I suggested that the dive training
I have talked about is limited to PADI?
Have you any reason, whatsoever, to believe my previous comments about the
quality of dive training are limited to PADI?
Lee
Lee Bell
>>>> No need to check. PADI certified divers are all safe enough. So is
>>>> everyone certified by other agencies. Otherwise, the bodies would be
>>>> stacking up all over the place, and they're not.
>>> Yeah, but sometimes those YMCA non-rates slide in. :-)
>> Even they are probably OK. Can't be sure. There aren't any bodies lying
>> around, but that may be because there are so few of them. Even if
>> they're not OK, eventually, they have to get a card from someone else,
>> then they're OK for sure. 8^)
> It's all a conspiracy. :-)
> All the poorly trained dead divers are taken away in the dark green
> helicopters.
I can't say for sure. Either they're being carted off by someone or the
resorts you believe are being safety conscious are simply being abusive.
Either there's a reason to check or there isn't. Which do you prefer?
Lee
Greg Mossman
I prefer to believe that there are plenty of divers that are safe after
becoming certified, but may forget some necessary skills if they don't dive
often enough. A check-out dive or other sort of pre-dive clearance test can
weed out those who think they remember what they learned in that class they
took three years ago but really don't.
On the other hand, I believe such facilities shouldn't bother those divers
who obviously don't need the tests, i.e. those that show up with their own
well-used gear, who write in a recent date where the waiver asks for last
dive date, etc., but they probably figure it can't hurt.
Dive Locker
years, I find no need to complain about someone wanting to check my
abilities as a diver. I mean I am completely comfy diving w/o a mask or
clearing my reg anytime, at any depth. If you guys are so nervous about
demonstrating a couple of simple, beginner level skills, perhaps I could
suggest a refresher course. Practice makes perfect guys and girls.
Todd
"Daniel Kessler" <dkes...@pop.cybernex.net> wrote in message
news:45361E95...@pop.cybernex.net...
Lee Bell
suggest you reconsider.
"Dive Locker" <di...@divelocker.net> wrote in message
news:78221$4538fe62$45493146$31...@KNOLOGY.NET...
chilly
"Dive Locker" <di...@divelocker.net> wrote in message
news:78221$4538fe62$45493146$31...@KNOLOGY.NET...
> years, I find no need to complain about someone wanting to check my
> abilities as a diver. I mean I am completely comfy diving w/o a mask or
> clearing my reg anytime, at any depth. If you guys are so nervous about
> demonstrating a couple of simple, beginner level skills, perhaps I could
> suggest a refresher course. Practice makes perfect guys and girls.
>
> Todd
What I don't like Todd, is when the dive op charges it out as a full dive.
Greg Mossman
news:78221$4538fe62$45493146$31...@KNOLOGY.NET...
> years, I find no need to complain about someone wanting to check my
> abilities as a diver. I mean I am completely comfy diving w/o a mask or
> clearing my reg anytime, at any depth. If you guys are so nervous about
> demonstrating a couple of simple, beginner level skills, perhaps I could
> suggest a refresher course. Practice makes perfect guys and girls.
800-1000 is 2-3 dives a day, every single day of the year.
"Our go to guy, Todd is an instructor, runs the shop floor, manages the back
room, and everything else he can think of. Todd always seems to be in two
places at once."
Two places at once? Apparently so.
Ron T
It is done just off the dock and done 15 minutes before voarding to go
on your first dive.
You submerge and obtain neutral status. The AKR guide swims up and
points to you - you clear your mask. Tada, done.
This serves three purposes -
1) is your gear working? a free flowing reg is fixed easier at the shop
next to the boat than on the boat a mile from the shop.
2) are you weighted corrctly? you can add/remove weight now rather than
waste time on the actual dive (or crash into coral because you don't
know the difference between 3mm and drysuit)
3) are you even marginally competent. AKR is not a hardcore diver
destination. This is a landlock cruiseship and many guests have little
actual dive experience. If they can't hover or clear, they will get
extra attention.
There you do that, load up and head out.
As for experience, who cares - I've been diving since 1980, and
full-cave since 1994. I'm confident in my skills and not afraid to show
them.
My issue with AKR is you dive as group and come up as a group regardless
of how much gas you have left. Most dives were in the 40 minute
neighborhoods IIRC, I was getting back on the boat with nearly 2000 psi.
After two days I didn't bother switching tanks out but once a day.
Add in no shore dives and I switched t Cocoview the next time.
-hh
Lee Bell wrote:
>
> I don't have a particular problem with resorts that find a way to assess the
> diving ability of their guests. I must admit, however, that testing
> someone's ability to clear their mask seems to be pushing things a bit far.
> That seems a bit basic and, if there actually are certified divers out there
> that can't perform this simple skill reliably, I would suggest that my
> previous comments about the quality of dive training were more accurate that
> even I thought.
A friend of mine who has done a lot of referral students has mentioned
to me that they've added mask clearing as one of the first things they
do for incoming AOW referrals. Says it gives them a handle on just how
good/bad their OW-I training was, and if to continue with the AOW
referral or not.
> Personally, I like the way they did things at Sunset House on Grand Cayman.
> All new arrivals go out on the same boat to a very nice, but quite shallow
> reef. The boat has a higher DM to guest ratio than their other boats.
> While everybody is diving, the DMs are assessing skills. The next day,
> divers go out on the regular boats, descretely divided among them on the
> basis of the first day's assessment. You have to be paying attention to
> even notice the selection. It takes a bit more effort, and a bit more skill
> on the part of the resort staff, but it accomplishes the same thing without
> demeaning anyone.
Another subtle 'new divers' screening I've seen in the Caymans is in
the selection of the first dive site of the week: it is typical to
avoid picking a mooring where the diveboat tails off the wall into
uber-deep water. Instead, they'll pick something slightly in from the
edge of the wall, preferably with a sand bottom at 50-60fsw. This
gives any "oops" events a soft bottom within diving limits for them to
crash on.
-hh
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
I choose neither of your explanations.
Can you force yourself to consider any other possibility?
I can think of one that is simple, logical, and has several times been
covered.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
news:12jhpsl...@corp.supernews.com...
The problem is, asking an individual to be the judge of his own skills can
be less than productive. :-)
I've had a CDL for 27 years, the first thing I do at a new trucking
company is go for a road test.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
news:ombligo-8AC442...@news-server2.tampabay.rr.com...
> I've been throuh the AKR checkout and it's no big deal.
>
> It is done just off the dock and done 15 minutes before voarding to go
> on your first dive.
>
> You submerge and obtain neutral status. The AKR guide swims up and
> points to you - you clear your mask. Tada, done.
>
> This serves three purposes -
>
> 1) is your gear working? a free flowing reg is fixed easier at the shop
> next to the boat than on the boat a mile from the shop.
>
> 2) are you weighted corrctly? you can add/remove weight now rather than
> waste time on the actual dive (or crash into coral because you don't
> know the difference between 3mm and drysuit)
>
> 3) are you even marginally competent. AKR is not a hardcore diver
> destination. This is a landlock cruiseship and many guests have little
> actual dive experience. If they can't hover or clear, they will get
> extra attention.
>
> There you do that, load up and head out.
So you didn't find it particularly "demeaning"?
I'd say that's what tripped the switch.
> As for experience, who cares - I've been diving since 1980, and
> full-cave since 1994. I'm confident in my skills and not afraid to show
> them.
Exactly.
> My issue with AKR is you dive as group and come up as a group regardless
> of how much gas you have left. Most dives were in the 40 minute
> neighborhoods IIRC, I was getting back on the boat with nearly 2000 psi.
> After two days I didn't bother switching tanks out but once a day.
As a former dive guide, I understand why they do that- they have a
schedule to keep.
Let your wallet do the talking, find a service more suited to your needs.
Lee Bell
> A friend of mine who has done a lot of referral students has mentioned
> to me that they've added mask clearing as one of the first things they
> do for incoming AOW referrals. Says it gives them a handle on just how
> good/bad their OW-I training was, and if to continue with the AOW
> referral or not.
AOW referrals? I don't think I've heard of such a thing. Entry level
referrals are common. I was not aware that there were Advanced referrals.
I was under the impression, perhaps mistaken, that the Advanced course was
primarily dive based rather than an easily separated academic portion. Am I
wrong?
>> Personally, I like the way they did things at Sunset House on Grand
>> Cayman.
>> All new arrivals go out on the same boat to a very nice, but quite
>> shallow
>> reef. The boat has a higher DM to guest ratio than their other boats.
>> While everybody is diving, the DMs are assessing skills. The next day,
>> divers go out on the regular boats, descretely divided among them on the
>> basis of the first day's assessment. You have to be paying attention to
>> even notice the selection. It takes a bit more effort, and a bit more
>> skill
>> on the part of the resort staff, but it accomplishes the same thing
>> without
>> demeaning anyone.
>
> Another subtle 'new divers' screening I've seen in the Caymans is in
> the selection of the first dive site of the week: it is typical to
> avoid picking a mooring where the diveboat tails off the wall into
> uber-deep water. Instead, they'll pick something slightly in from the
> edge of the wall, preferably with a sand bottom at 50-60fsw. This
> gives any "oops" events a soft bottom within diving limits for them to
> crash on.
Hence my mention of the "very nice, but quite shallow reef."
Lee
Lee Bell
>> I can't say for sure. Either they're being carted off by someone or the
>> resorts you believe are being safety conscious are simply being abusive.
>> Either there's a reason to check or there isn't. Which do you prefer?
> I choose neither of your explanations.
> Can you force yourself to consider any other possibility?
> I can think of one that is simple, logical, and has several times been
> covered.
It'll be hard. The only excuse I can find for doing the test is to be
safety conscious, which I believe was your conclusion. If that's not the
reason, it seems that they're being abusive. If you've got something to
add, add it.
Lee Bell
> The problem is, asking an individual to be the judge of his own skills
> can be less than productive. :-)
>
> I've had a CDL for 27 years, the first thing I do at a new trucking
> company is go for a road test.
And, as I recall, find a way to avoid the normal initial period working with
another driver.
By the way, we can point to the pile of bodies indicating that the driver
training program in this country is inadequate. Much more so than in
diving, evidence that a driver's license, even a commercial one is not an
indication of competence is everywhere we look.
Lee
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
Irregardless of that irrelevent point, I don't feel "demeaned" when I'm
asked to take a driving test when I apply for a job.
As to the irrelevent point, please cite where the frequency of commercial
driver accidents is related to the quality of training in this country- and
good luck.
It's related to industry control of puppet politicians, and DOT
corruption, and hack labor laws putting your family's lives at risk.
It has nothing to do with training, just like in the scuba industry.
Like diving, you could train a monkey to drive a truck.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick wrote
>
>>> I can't say for sure. Either they're being carted off by someone or the
>>> resorts you believe are being safety conscious are simply being abusive.
>>> Either there's a reason to check or there isn't. Which do you prefer?
>
>> I choose neither of your explanations.
>> Can you force yourself to consider any other possibility?
>> I can think of one that is simple, logical, and has several times been
>> covered.
>
> It'll be hard.
:-) Not if you have an open mind.
> The only excuse I can find for doing the test is to be safety conscious,
> which I believe was your conclusion. If that's not the reason, it seems
> that they're being abusive. If you've got something to add, add it.
Greg already nailed it, first try.
You take, greatly for granted, several things.
You live in the dive capitol of the country.
You dive frequently.
You've been diving over four decades.
You take your level of skill and comfort for granted.
I also have -absolutely- no idea -why- you think a resort who deliberately
seek to abuse it's guests in any way when they are its sole purpose for
continuing to exist, but we digress.
Lee Bell
>> And, as I recall, find a way to avoid the normal initial period working
>> with another driver.
>> By the way, we can point to the pile of bodies indicating that the driver
>> training program in this country is inadequate. Much more so than in
>> diving, evidence that a driver's license, even a commercial one is not an
>> indication of competence is everywhere we look.
> Irregardless of that irrelevent point, I don't feel "demeaned" when I'm
> asked to take a driving test when I apply for a job.
It's not irrelevent at all. You're the one that claimed that dive training
was just fine because there isn't a stack of bodies laying around. Now
you're claiming that you're not demeaned when asked to take a test for
something that is known to be subject to inadequate training by the body
count and comparing it to diving, where you previously claimed the training
was fine.
> As to the irrelevent point, please cite where the frequency of commercial
> driver accidents is related to the quality of training in this country-
> and good luck.
Do you deny they exist?
If not, the point is made.
> It's related to industry control of puppet politicians, and DOT
> corruption, and hack labor laws putting your family's lives at risk.
No puppet politician, currupt DOT person or hack labor law ever cross the
center line on US 27, heading head on at 70 + at me. A commercial truck
driver did.
> It has nothing to do with training, just like in the scuba industry.
> Like diving, you could train a monkey to drive a truck.
So the body count is high because?
Lee
Lee Bell
>> The only excuse I can find for doing the test is to be safety conscious,
>> which I believe was your conclusion. If that's not the reason, it seems
>> that they're being abusive. If you've got something to add, add it.
>
> Greg already nailed it, first try.
> You take, greatly for granted, several things.
> You live in the dive capitol of the country.
> You dive frequently.
> You've been diving over four decades.
> You take your level of skill and comfort for granted.
Where's the reason you think they do it?
> I also have -absolutely- no idea -why- you think a resort who
> deliberately seek to abuse it's guests in any way when they are its sole
> purpose for continuing to exist, but we digress.
1. Because they think they can. Several have indicated they're wrong.
2. Because they target inexperienced divers who don't understand the power
of voting with their feet?
3. Because it makes their insurance company happy?
4. Because they, like me, think that quality training is not consistent and
they expect failures from the relatively inexperienced divers that makes up
their market?
Lee
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick wrote
>
> >> And, as I recall, find a way to avoid the normal initial period working
>>> with another driver.
>>> By the way, we can point to the pile of bodies indicating that the
>>> driver training program in this country is inadequate. Much more so
>>> than in diving, evidence that a driver's license, even a commercial one
>>> is not an indication of competence is everywhere we look.
>
>> Irregardless of that irrelevent point, I don't feel "demeaned" when I'm
>> asked to take a driving test when I apply for a job.
>
> It's not irrelevent at all. You're the one that claimed that dive
> training was just fine because there isn't a stack of bodies laying
> around.
> Now you're claiming that you're not demeaned when asked to take a test
> for something that is known to be subject to inadequate training by the
> body count and comparing it to diving, where you previously claimed the
> training was fine.
What in god's name did you just say.
>> As to the irrelevent point, please cite where the frequency of
>> commercial driver accidents is related to the quality of training in this
>> country- and good luck.
>
> Do you deny they exist?
I deny they're related to the quality of training.
I'm not aware of any driving schools that train you to violate hours of
service, or fall asleep behind the wheel.
> If not, the point is made.
>
>> It's related to industry control of puppet politicians, and DOT
>> corruption, and hack labor laws putting your family's lives at risk.
>
> No puppet politician, currupt DOT person or hack labor law ever cross the
> center line on US 27, heading head on at 70 + at me. A commercial truck
> driver did.
He wasn't taught to do that in school.
It's even a safe bet, that, just like you, he was taught what the
different types and colors of lines mean, and, which side of them to stay
on.
>> It has nothing to do with training, just like in the scuba industry.
>> Like diving, you could train a monkey to drive a truck.
>
> So the body count is high because?
They drive too long and too hard, which, they're taught -not- to do in
school.
And the law has been change twice recently to -increase- the allowable
times one can drive.
And those trucking companies and DOT persons and hack labor guys, that
you're not threatened by, are now drafting laws to allow American trucking
companies to hire Mexican nationals as subcontractors to drive American
trucks, which -will- be swerving at you very, very soon.
They will have -no- training for you to blame. :-)
>
> Lee
>
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" wrote
>
>
>>> The only excuse I can find for doing the test is to be safety conscious,
>>> which I believe was your conclusion. If that's not the reason, it seems
>>> that they're being abusive. If you've got something to add, add it.
>>
>> Greg already nailed it, first try.
>> You take, greatly for granted, several things.
>> You live in the dive capitol of the country.
>> You dive frequently.
>> You've been diving over four decades.
>> You take your level of skill and comfort for granted.
>
> Where's the reason you think they do it?
Just to get a general sense of how long it's been since you were in the
water, plus, it's a good check for gear before you're out on the boat.
You're fixating on this "mask clearing" thing like it's some harbinger of
doom.
It's just the first thing that comes to mind for most people.
If you're going to check a few basic resort skills, what would they be?
Shooting a lift bag?
Replacing a regulator diaphram?
Breathing from a tank valve?
ESA from 120?
Mick Whittingham
<plee...@bellsouth.net> writes
>Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" wrote
>
SNIP
>
>Where's the reason you think they do it?
>
>> I also have -absolutely- no idea -why- you think a resort who
>> deliberately seek to abuse it's guests in any way when they are its sole
>> purpose for continuing to exist, but we digress.
>
>1. Because they think they can. Several have indicated they're wrong.
>2. Because they target inexperienced divers who don't understand the power
>of voting with their feet?
>3. Because it makes their insurance company happy?
This may be the very reason. Dive operation have to abide by local laws,
perhaps this involves using local insurance companies. It could be that
in the requirements placed upon the dive operation to be covered by
insurance, the dive site has to in addition to any other requirement,
for example:
Visual check of the health and physical ability of the diver to dive.
Check of approved qualification.
In water check of a basic skills.
OK I'm making it up but this could be the case.
>4. Because they, like me, think that quality training is not consistent and
>they expect failures from the relatively inexperienced divers that makes up
>their market?
>
>Lee
>
>
--
Mick Whittingham
'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.'
William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2.
Ron T
"Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com>
wrote:
> "Ron T" <omb...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:ombligo-8AC442...@news-server2.tampabay.rr.com...
> > I've been throuh the AKR checkout and it's no big deal.
> >
SNIP
> >
> > There you do that, load up and head out.
>
> So you didn't find it particularly "demeaning"?
>
Not at all. It's ten minutes out of a week, big whoop.
Like I said I am confident in my skills and I don't mind showing them. I
also don't mind having a chance to see the skills of others I'll be
diving with. Maybe I can help them (or at least avoid them).
>
> As a former dive guide, I understand why they do that- they have a
> schedule to keep.
What schedule?
All the boats go out at once and come back at once - three times a day
(10, 1 & 4 IIRC), so your down another20-30 minutes, whats the harm.
They need to rush back so you can wash up and get a nap before lunch?
Their policy is simply that the divemaster must have all divers under
observation at all times. I respect the rule for the same reason I'll
drive the speed limit on a empty freeway - because it is the rule.
But it is annoying when your more qualified and a better diver than the
divemaster.
>
> Let your wallet do the talking, find a service more suited to your needs.
And I did, but I still suggest AKR to divers it is suited for.
Lee Bell
>> Where's the reason you think they do it?
> Just to get a general sense of how long it's been since you were in the
> water, plus, it's a good check for gear before you're out on the boat.
Like I said, abusive. Testing does not show how long it's been since their
customer was in the water and I don't accept their right to know. If they
want to know, they can ask or they can review a log book just like they've
been doing for years. If you're talking about their gear, their responsible
for checking that out before I get to the shop and certainly before it goes
on the boat. If you're talking my gear, again, they have no right.
> You're fixating on this "mask clearing" thing like it's some harbinger of
> doom.
Not at all. Mask clearing is the test that was mentioned and, therefore,
the one being referred to. If it had been nose picking, that would be the
reference.
The point is, a certification is supposed to be what it says, a
certification of competence. The operators are replacing their own test for
the certification of the agencies and that, my friend, is the clear evidence
of inadequate training you asked for in the past. When the shops most
closely affiliated with the training agencies, no longer trust the
certifications issued by those agencies, it's a reasonable conclusion that
the certifications and whatever is behind them, are not what the agencies
were paid to provide.
> If you're going to check a few basic resort skills, what would they be?
What skills did you test before your last doctor's appointment? What test
did you give your attorney the last time you used one? What test did the
businesses you've worked for give their CPAs before hiring them for an
audit? Why is it you think a medical certification, legal certification, or
financial certifications, all certifications that can hurt you if they'r
enot, are evidence of knowledge and ability, and a diving certification,
which can only hurt the diver if it's not, isn't?
Lee
Lee Bell
>>> As to the irrelevent point, please cite where the frequency of
>>> commercial driver accidents is related to the quality of training in
>>> this country- and good luck.
>>
>> Do you deny they exist?
>
> I deny they're related to the quality of training.
You have licensed drivers out there killing themselves and others. There
are only a few reasons for that:
1. They're deliberate murderers or suicides. I doubt that's the case often.
2. They were inadequately trained before they were issued a certification of
competence.
3. They were inadequately tested, by those paid and authorized to test them
who, by the way, get to retest them every few years.
> I'm not aware of any driving schools that train you to violate hours of
> service, or fall asleep behind the wheel.
Nobody intentionally trains anybody to do the wrong thing. Training is
supposed to teach them to do the right thing well enough that they
understand the need and comply. If it didn't, then it wasn't good enough.
>> No puppet politician, currupt DOT person or hack labor law ever cross the
>> center line on US 27, heading head on at 70 + at me. A commercial truck
>> driver did.
>
> He wasn't taught to do that in school.
He wasn't adequately taught not to either.
>> So the body count is high because?
>
> They drive too long and too hard, which, they're taught -not- to do in
> school.
Apparently not.
> And the law has been change twice recently to -increase- the allowable
> times one can drive.
> And those trucking companies and DOT persons and hack labor guys, that
> you're not threatened by, are now drafting laws to allow American trucking
> companies to hire Mexican nationals as subcontractors to drive American
> trucks, which -will- be swerving at you very, very soon.
> They will have -no- training for you to blame. :-)
Then I'll have evidence of inadequate training that even you'll have to
admit.
Lee
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick wrote
>
>>> Where's the reason you think they do it?
>
>> Just to get a general sense of how long it's been since you were in the
>> water, plus, it's a good check for gear before you're out on the boat.
>
> Like I said, abusive.
You have the right to be stubborn and close minded, and insist that a
business than depends on -nothing- but it's world wide reputation for
customer service would needlessly torment it's primarily delicate and
egotisical decidedly upper middle class world traveling customers because...
they... get off on it...?
"How can we fuck with the rich white folk today, since we can't roast them
any more?"
I can't find a scrap of logic here.
>Testing does not show how long it's been since their customer was in the
>water and I don't accept their right to know.
Then if I was you, I wouldn't go there.
I'm sure they'll careen out of business.
>If they want to know, they can ask or they can review a log book just like
>they've been doing for years. If you're talking about their gear, their
>responsible for checking that out before I get to the shop and certainly
>before it goes on the boat. If you're talking my gear, again, they have no
>right.
Wrong, it's their boat, and they are responsible for your life, and
service to the other customers.
>> You're fixating on this "mask clearing" thing like it's some harbinger
>> of doom.
>
> Not at all. Mask clearing is the test that was mentioned and, therefore,
> the one being referred to. If it had been nose picking, that would be the
> reference.
And I notice you have no alternative.
They don't know "Lee Bell", or that you would blame yourself for a gear
failure (or your own death, for that matter).
They just know about the average complaining customer, and the average law
suit.
Sorry, Lee, you're King in your world, but just another customer to them.
-hh
>
> Irregardless of that irrelevent point, I don't feel "demeaned" when I'm
> asked to take a driving test when I apply for a job.
That's because of the "applying for a job" part.
I've rented probably hundreds of cars from Hertz, Avis, etc ... never
once had a driving proficiency test: all that that they've ever asked
to see is plastic (driver's licence and credit card).
Only exception has been with AutoEurope, when I was renting a higher
end car for driving on the Autobahn in Germany: they wanted licence +
two (2) credit cards; still no proficiency test.
> Like diving, you could train a monkey to drive a truck.
No monkey, but there is a divingcat & dog:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL-fcX1MIH0
For driving, some 'monkeys' only do it while drinking beer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjZKDaeazYU
Chimps are more of the 'back seat' type:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu0_AcJKXYc
-hh
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote
>
>>>> As to the irrelevent point, please cite where the frequency of
>>>> commercial driver accidents is related to the quality of training in
>>>> this country- and good luck.
>>>
>>> Do you deny they exist?
>>
>> I deny they're related to the quality of training.
>
> You have licensed drivers out there killing themselves and others. There
> are only a few reasons for that:
> 1. They're deliberate murderers or suicides. I doubt that's the case
> often.
> 2. They were inadequately trained before they were issued a certification
> of competence.
> 3. They were inadequately tested, by those paid and authorized to test
> them who, by the way, get to retest them every few years.
As is often the case, these are all incorrect.
What other possibility exists?
>> I'm not aware of any driving schools that train you to violate hours of
>> service, or fall asleep behind the wheel.
>
> Nobody intentionally trains anybody to do the wrong thing. Training is
> supposed to teach them to do the right thing well enough that they
> understand the need and comply. If it didn't, then it wasn't good enough.
Nope.
>>> No puppet politician, currupt DOT person or hack labor law ever cross
>>> the center line on US 27, heading head on at 70 + at me. A commercial
>>> truck driver did.
>>
>> He wasn't taught to do that in school.
>
> He wasn't adequately taught not to either.
You're saying that if a person makes one mistake balancing their
checkbook, they were never taught how to do it correctly.
It's zero logic.
You're telling me that if I forget how to read my tables (which I do,
almost every year), that I wasn't properly taught how to read them.
And I've learned, and ben tested, several different times, in several
different classes.
>>> So the body count is high because?
>>
>> They drive too long and too hard, which, they're taught -not- to do in
>> school.
>
> Apparently not.
Whatever you say, in your world.
>> And the law has been change twice recently to -increase- the allowable
>> times one can drive.
>
>> And those trucking companies and DOT persons and hack labor guys, that
>> you're not threatened by, are now drafting laws to allow American
>> trucking companies to hire Mexican nationals as subcontractors to drive
>> American trucks, which -will- be swerving at you very, very soon.
>> They will have -no- training for you to blame. :-)
>
> Then I'll have evidence of inadequate training that even you'll have to
> admit.
You've had no evidence of any kind, so far.
> Lee
>
-hh
Lee Bell wrote:
> -hh wrote
>
> > A friend of mine who has done a lot of referral students has mentioned
> > to me that they've added mask clearing as one of the first things they
>
> AOW referrals? I don't think I've heard of such a thing. Entry level
> referrals are common. I was not aware that there were Advanced referrals.
Might have been a misrecollection on my part: the diver was going to
them to get their AOW training, but they do a 'mask clearing' as
personal quality control...and often found them wanting.
> > Another subtle 'new divers' screening I've seen in the Caymans is in
> > the selection of the first dive site of the week: it is typical to
> > avoid picking a mooring where the diveboat tails off the wall into
> > uber-deep water. Instead, they'll pick something slightly in from the
> > edge of the wall, preferably with a sand bottom at 50-60fsw. This
> > gives any "oops" events a soft bottom within diving limits for them to
> > crash on.
>
> Hence my mention of the "very nice, but quite shallow reef."
Actually, the wall will still be close by - just a short swim. Main
thing is that the water directly under the boat isn't off the wall.
-hh
Al Wells
@bellsouth.net says...
> I must admit, however, that testing
> someone's ability to clear their mask seems to be pushing things a bit far.
When I teach a class, that is the one skill that gives students the most
trouble. I can quickly tell more about someone's comfort in the water by
watching him do this than any other task I couls ask him to perform.
In Charleston, there were many uncertified divers who had alot of
experience diving in the river. There were a few shops that would fill
tanks for them because they knew them well. After the fatality of an
uncertified diver at the dam, the shops stopped filling tanks for them
and told them to get certified. I certified several, and every single
one of them had a problem with mask removal/replacement. Something
happens to some people when their faces get wet.
Lee Bell
> You have the right to be stubborn and close minded, and insist that a
> business than depends on -nothing- but it's world wide reputation for
> customer service would needlessly torment it's primarily delicate and
> egotisical decidedly upper middle class world traveling customers
> because... they... get off on it...?
As do you. You're exercising your right extensively.
> I can't find a scrap of logic here.
Your working hard not to find it.
> Then if I was you, I wouldn't go there.
Neither I, nor several others will, as we've already said.
> Wrong, it's their boat, and they are responsible for your life, and
> service to the other customers.
Wrong. They are not responsible for my life and they present each diver
with a waiver stating exactly that. They require them to sign it.
> And I notice you have no alternative.
Try again. I posted it days ago. Look with even a slightly open mind and
I'm sure you'll find it.
Lee Bell
> You're saying that if a person makes one mistake balancing their
> checkbook, they were never taught how to do it correctly.
Nobody dies because their checkbook is out of balance.
> Whatever you say, in your world.
They're dying in yours.
> You've had no evidence of any kind, so far.
Like you said, in your world. The dive operators disagree. A great many
very experienced divers disagree. The entire GUE organization disagreed. I
disagree.
Lee Bell
> Actually, the wall will still be close by - just a short swim. Main
> thing is that the water directly under the boat isn't off the wall.
The wall is pretty close to everything on the west side of Grand Cayman. As
I recall, the first dive, the one used to assess customer skills, was at
Devil's Grotto, or nearby.
Lee
Lee Bell
> In Charleston, there were many uncertified divers who had alot of
> experience diving in the river. There were a few shops that would fill
> tanks for them because they knew them well. After the fatality of an
> uncertified diver at the dam, the shops stopped filling tanks for them
> and told them to get certified. I certified several, and every single
> one of them had a problem with mask removal/replacement. Something
> happens to some people when their faces get wet.
I think no training qualifies as inadequate training.
Actually, I'm a bit surprised that people diving in a flowing river would
lack this skill. I would expect that jarred masks would be a bit more
common there than in most open water environments.
Lee
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" wrote
>
>> You're saying that if a person makes one mistake balancing their
>> checkbook, they were never taught how to do it correctly.
>
> Nobody dies because their checkbook is out of balance.
So in your world, any mistake, ever, is a certain indication that either
one was not properly taught, or did not properly learn.
Lee Bell
>>> You're saying that if a person makes one mistake balancing their
>>> checkbook, they were never taught how to do it correctly.
>>
>> Nobody dies because their checkbook is out of balance.
> So in your world, any mistake, ever, is a certain indication that either
> one was not properly taught, or did not properly learn.
Cite?
You're making this stuff up, right?
You figure the Brady campagne is so popular, you'll try the same tactics,
right?
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
No, I'm refering to your -exact- words.
Memory problem?
>>> As to the irrelevent point, please cite where the frequency of
>>> commercial driver accidents is related to the quality of training in
>>> this country- and good luck.
>>
>> Do you deny they exist?
>
> I deny they're related to the quality of training.
You have licensed drivers out there killing themselves and others. There
are only a few reasons for that:
1. They're deliberate murderers or suicides. I doubt that's the case often.
2. They were inadequately trained before they were issued a certification of
competence.
3. They were inadequately tested, by those paid and authorized to test them
who, by the way, get to retest them every few years.
> I'm not aware of any driving schools that train you to violate hours of
Lee Bell
>>> So in your world, any mistake, ever, is a certain indication that
I read everything you cited. I did not see the words "any mistake, ever"
anywhere in them. Apparently you did since you say they are my "-exact-
words." Perhaps you've redefined what that means.
Lee
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
I did, right after the "Brady Tactics" cut.
Somebody around here had recently chastized me for personal attacks, and
that surely sounded like one to me.
Except for you, Lee, many people learn how to perform an easy task like,
stay in their lane, or, clear their mask, and, either they forget it with
the passage of time, or, fall out of practice with a certain skill, or,
they -choose-, by heaven, to break a certain rule, and it has -nothing- to
do with the quality of training they recieved.
I notice you dive solo and without a snorkle (as do I).
This would indicate, by your supposition, that you're a poorly trained
diver.
Lee Bell
>> I read everything you cited. I did not see the words "any mistake, ever"
>> anywhere in them. Apparently you did since you say they are my "-exact-
>> words." Perhaps you've redefined what that means.
>
> I did, right after the "Brady Tactics" cut.
OK. Brady was wrong. Make it Clinton tactics.
> Except for you, Lee, many people learn how to perform an easy task like,
> stay in their lane, or, clear their mask, and, either they forget it with
> the passage of time, or, fall out of practice with a certain skill, or,
> they -choose-, by heaven, to break a certain rule, and it has -nothing- to
> do with the quality of training they recieved.
You mean, except for me and every other person that has posted in response
to the mask clearing question. right? So far, every single one of them has
responded that they practice that particular skill more than any other.
> I notice you dive solo and without a snorkle (as do I).
Not often solo, usually without a snorkle.
> This would indicate, by your supposition, that you're a poorly trained
> diver.
That's an interesting conclusion. Lets see:
1. There is a certification for solo diving. It's normally considered an
advanced certification, something only for the most experienced and most
knowledgeable. That would seem to me to indicate that those who sucessfully
dive solo are, in fact, quite well trained. In fact, by your standards, it
must be so. Otherwise, there would be stacks of bodies, the measure of
incompetence you, yourself established.
2. One of, and perhaps several of the world's most experienced, highly
trained and best regarded dive organizations train for and do their dives
without snorkle. That would seem to me to indicate that those who also
sucessfully do so are, in fact, qu ite well trained.
You picked your examples very poorly.
Lee
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick wrote
>
>>> I read everything you cited. I did not see the words "any mistake,
>>> ever" anywhere in them. Apparently you did since you say they are my
>>> "-exact- words." Perhaps you've redefined what that means.
>>
>> I did, right after the "Brady Tactics" cut.
>
> OK. Brady was wrong. Make it Clinton tactics.
Whatever.
>> Except for you, Lee, many people learn how to perform an easy task like,
>> stay in their lane, or, clear their mask, and, either they forget it with
>> the passage of time, or, fall out of practice with a certain skill, or,
>> they -choose-, by heaven, to break a certain rule, and it has -nothing-
>> to do with the quality of training they recieved.
>
> You mean, except for me and every other person that has posted in response
> to the mask clearing question. right? So far, every single one of them
> has responded that they practice that particular skill more than any
> other.
None of them has alluded to the point that a single example of mistake or
discrepancy at any time in a career is a firm indication of a lack of
initial training.
Infact, some have raised the opposite point.
>> I notice you dive solo and without a snorkle (as do I).
>
> Not often solo, usually without a snorkle.
>
>> This would indicate, by your supposition, that you're a poorly trained
>> diver.
>
> That's an interesting conclusion. Lets see:
> 1. There is a certification for solo diving.
Except you don't have it.
Next.
> 2. One of, and perhaps several of the world's most experienced, highly
> trained and best regarded dive organizations train for and do their
> dives without snorkle.
That still has nothing to do with your OW training.
> That would seem to me to indicate that those who also sucessfully do so
> are, in fact, qu ite well trained.
>
> You picked your examples very poorly.
No, it's just you mitigating your own line of reasoning with examples that
don't represent you.
Lee Bell
>>>> I read everything you cited. I did not see the words "any mistake,
>>>> ever" anywhere in them. Apparently you did since you say they are my
>>>> "-exact- words." Perhaps you've redefined what that means.
>>>
>>> I did, right after the "Brady Tactics" cut.
>>
>> OK. Brady was wrong. Make it Clinton tactics.
>
> Whatever.
>
>>> Except for you, Lee, many people learn how to perform an easy task
>>> like, stay in their lane, or, clear their mask, and, either they forget
>>> it with the passage of time, or, fall out of practice with a certain
>>> skill, or, they -choose-, by heaven, to break a certain rule, and it
>>> has -nothing- to do with the quality of training they recieved.
>>
>> You mean, except for me and every other person that has posted in
>> response to the mask clearing question. right? So far, every single one
>> of them has responded that they practice that particular skill more than
>> any other.
>
> None of them has alluded to the point that a single example of mistake or
> discrepancy at any time in a career is a firm indication of a lack of
> initial training.
You're correct. None of them, including me, said that. So far, you're the
only one that's used those words.
>> That's an interesting conclusion. Lets see:
>> 1. There is a certification for solo diving.
>
> Except you don't have it.
Are we talking training or certifications? Do you recognize the difference?
>> 2. One of, and perhaps several of the world's most experienced, highly
>> trained and best regarded dive organizations train for and do their
>> dives without snorkle.
>
> That still has nothing to do with your OW training.
It has everything to do with your presumption that diving without a snorkel,
without incident, by the way, is an indication of poor training.
Lee