Poll on equipment concessions for the Ibiza Freediving GP

[sebastien murat]

Dear all,
There has been some discussion amongst some friends that the Ibiza Freediving Grand-Prix might prove too difficult without at least some ergonomic aids, such as for example, a mask, nose-plug, ballast, wetsuit, and reference-line.

Since no rules should ever set in concrete I thought that running a poll on the issue might be appropriate, the results of which would effectively establish the actual event rules. To vote it matters not whether you're thinking of participating or not.

Should visualization, orientation and equalization aids be allowed in the Ibiza Freediving GP?

To vote simply answer yes or no.

To vote in a poll, simply select which option you want to vote for, and click the [Vote!] button. You may view the current results for a poll before you vote by clicking the 'View Results' link. Voting in a poll is entirely optional. You may vote for any of the available options, or cast no vote at all.
Generally, once you have voted in a poll, you will not be able to change your vote later, so place your vote carefully!

[trux]

What about swimsuits? Are they in the category concerned by the voting too?

[sebastien murat]

In either case, please wear a swimsuit. Though this is supposed to be a purist event I don't need to see everything.

On the other hand, if you really meant wetsuit then I'll have to reconfigure the poll.

Seb

[efattah]

My point of view:

1. Noseclips
- Banning noseclips unfortunately gives the advantage to the genetically gifted athletes who can equalize without pinching their nose via BTV. Further, inverted descents without a noseclip will flood the sinuses and eventually flood the eustachian tubes, creating a significant risk for sinus & inner ear infections, and in some cases maybe even permanent damage. For these reasons I would say that nose-clips should be allowed.

2. Wetsuits
- Banning wetsuits does not create any of the above problems. There is no genetic advantage or disadvantage (the athlete can choose to put on some fat if so desired), and it has been shown that cold tolerance can be trained, and dietary changes have a big impact too. So I think wetsuits should definitely not be allowed.

3. Goggles
- Banning goggles can create a few problems. First is one of safety. If there are no lanyards and the diver is totally untethered, then a no-goggle policy clearly creates a danger. If the diver is tethered, the lack of vision is not that unsafe. In the tethered case, a no-goggle policy does create a disadvantage for people with strong nearsightedness who wear regular contact lenses. Since regular contact lenses cannot be worn underwater (else they are destroyed from contamination), then such a person basically has to go blind on the surface as well as underwater, while his conterparts can at least see underwater. The good vision person will be able to see upon surfacing as well, to orient himself and even focus his vision to avoid a hypoxic event. The very nearsighted person will be blind upon reaching the surface and unable to even grab onto things.
- If 'no visual aids' is the true motivation, then there is a messy solution. That would be to allow anyone to wear unmodified swim goggles filled with sterile saline. That way a nearsighted person could still wear contacts, although they would still be blind underwater like everyone else. Alternatively, myopic athletes could be encouraged to purchase disposable contact lenses to use during the dive and discard afterwards. If any soft contacts are allowed (even disposables), there is a minor chance of cheating, that an athlete would purchase +15D soft contact lenses, which would give a very minor improvement in underwater vision (though total blindness on the surface).

I'm not really able to answer the poll, because my answers would be:
1. Nose clip: YES
2. Wetsuit: NO
3. Goggles: Depends on the wording of the rules

[jome]

My first instinct is to say ban everything - that's what makes this interesting.

But I think it might be a bit off putting to alot of people, so if you want it to be (like I'm reading between the lines) event for all levels of divers, then maybe allowing some "comfort items" such as noseplug+goggles or mask might be a good idea.

But absolutely no to reference line, fins, wetsuits and weights!

[naiad]

Originally Posted by efattah

- Banning wetsuits does not create any of the above problems. There is no genetic advantage or disadvantage (the athlete can choose to put on some fat if so desired), and it has been shown that cold tolerance can be trained, and dietary changes have a big impact too. So I think wetsuits should definitely not be allowed.

I am not so sure that there is no genetic advantage or disadvantage. I don't gain weight, and my cold tolerance has hardly improved at all with training.

But in this case, I say no wetsuit, if it is meant to be a competition in true freediving with no equipment.

Lucia

[watts]

Nose clip only.

[cebaztian]

Originally Posted by watts

Nose clip only.

Noseclip is essential. Can anyone tell us of a dive (head down) without a noseclip (or mask closing your nose)? What depth did you reach?

Mask/googles is not essential but will increase the popularity of the event. Might end up being just a few hard core people otherwise.

Sebastian

[sebastien murat]

Her'e the nesxt step that completes the diver, but it requires a very good undertsanding of dive physiology and physics (not to be understated)

Water equalization part II:

Tubes open --> inversion (i.e., head-first) --> venting of air in the middle-ear leads to complete flooding--> equalization no longer a problem or an issue. Means that head-first no limit dives are possible once again!

But

must open both tubes otherwise --> vertigo!


This technique which I've been using since August last year is one step-up from water equalization at depth since it occurs from the surface. By changing mediums in the first movement, equalization manoeuvers are no longer required. Moreover, provided the tubes are then closed upon re-surfacing no equalization is required from dive-to-dive.


Seb

[Billextreme]

Hi Seb,

...this is the kind of equalization Pipin and Audrey did.

/B

[sebastien murat]

actually, they equalized with air and then switched at about 90m. At this depth the pressure gardient is so shallow that to reach 170m only requires compressing the air in the sinus-ear complex; there is no need for flooding. My technique which until recently was similar to that involves emptying the air out of these cavities by inverting.

S

[Billextreme]

Well..

They both filled up the sinus on the worm-up before the dive, and what I know also part of the ear from inside. I don't know how much, but it did work.

/B

[wolleneugebauer]

no wetsuit, no weights, nofins, no lens googles!

swimsuit (for the girls) or trunks (for the boys) + mask only = pure freediving!

[sebastien murat]

My mistake then Bill, but a couple of points:

Water entering the sinuses...sure, thats' a no brainer

Water entering the middle-ear or hovering around the Eustachian tube openings, I have doubts. For one, water doesn't hit the opening to the tubes until reaching a depth of about 7 m, if diving from the surface without tilting the head back, in my experience. That's a 1.7 atm pressure diff. I don't know there warm-up depths, but I'd bet that if they were warming-up with a nose-plug, there's a good reason for it. Once the water hits the opening to the tubes, there is mucous production which makes opening the tubes, or allowing either air or water through them practically impossible in subsequent dives, that is, unless you filled them in one quick motion. I've been doing this kind of water equalization for some time and I'have no problems keeping the tubes open, descending at speeds of ~3 m/s. Consequently, I'm forced to believe that, though they make have allowed water to enter their noses/sinuse during the warm-up it wasn't of sufficient quantity to enetr/touch the Eustachian tube-opening, despite differing claims (by them?)

Seb

[naiad]

I have managed wet equalisation at 2m (accidentally!).
I described what happened here.