-
Welcome to the DeeperBlue.com Forums, the largest online community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing. To gain full access to the DeeperBlue.com Forums you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
- Join over 44,280+ fellow diving enthusiasts from around the world on this forum
- Participate in and browse from over 516,210+ posts.
- Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
- Post your own photos or view from 7,441+ user submitted images.
- All this and much more...
You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
200m deep down
- Thread startertodeep
- Start date
Thread Status: Hello
, There was no answer in this thread for more than 60 days.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
Well, i think that the question of why making it official is answered... he also had to make a false dive for the cameras, just to make a documentary. I don't know you guys but i have a strange taste in my mouth.
neoprenelove,
if you insist on being pedantic, the poll was "Will Patrick make the 200m barrier?"
result: yes, he did, twice in fact.
good, that's settled then. now let's move on...
if you insist on being pedantic, the poll was "Will Patrick make the 200m barrier?"
result: yes, he did, twice in fact.
good, that's settled then. now let's move on...
i understand that rules and regulations are important to you. they're not as important to me. if for example, Tom Sietas claims to have done a 10min static, then as far as i'm concerned he is the first person to do 10mins. end of story. i *believe* Seb Murat was the first to do 100m, but i may be wrong about that. the point is that i don't really care whether it was done officially or not.
imagine someone asks you how deep you have dived. you might have done 40m in training, but only 30m "officially". do you answer 30m or 40m? does your 40m not count? do you pretend it never happened because it wasn't "official"?
if you qualify such a question with official or unofficial then the answer is easy, but if you leave the question open, e.g. "who was the first to do 100m?", then the answer becomes a matter of opinion...
imagine someone asks you how deep you have dived. you might have done 40m in training, but only 30m "officially". do you answer 30m or 40m? does your 40m not count? do you pretend it never happened because it wasn't "official"?
if you qualify such a question with official or unofficial then the answer is easy, but if you leave the question open, e.g. "who was the first to do 100m?", then the answer becomes a matter of opinion...
if you are going to start recognising stuff that is "unofficial" - how can you recognise anything? how do we know that some greek sponge diver hundreds of years ago was not the first to 100m? there has to be a benchmark
Most freedivers I know will give two answers to "how deep can you dive?" - in competition and in training - recognising that the "official" performance will always count for more. If you can't prove you did it, what is the point?
Personally it drive me mad when people say stuff like "well I do loads more in training"... if you are into competing, do it in an official environment. If you are not into competing, then why do you even care what depth/time/distance you can do?
Most freedivers I know will give two answers to "how deep can you dive?" - in competition and in training - recognising that the "official" performance will always count for more. If you can't prove you did it, what is the point?
Personally it drive me mad when people say stuff like "well I do loads more in training"... if you are into competing, do it in an official environment. If you are not into competing, then why do you even care what depth/time/distance you can do?
i'm only giving my own personal viewpoint on the matter. i know not everyone will agree and i don't expect them to. i personally don't care whether a dive is "official" or not. i am interested in the absolute limits, regardless of how officially they were achieved. i know there many other freedivers think in the same way. there's more to freediving than rules and judges. if someone claims to achieved some performance then i would generally believe it, unless i really doubt it for some reason.
an example...
if Joe's PB is 80m (an officially verified dive) and Bill's PB 90m (an unofficial training dive) and someone asks me "who has gone the deepest?", i would of course say Bill. i undertstand that some people might say Joe!
re: sponge diver... yes, i do believe Haggi Statti was the first person to dive to 70m (or whatever the figure was) because there is very strong evidence that he did it. "officially" he wasn't the first, but in my own personal opinion, he was...
an example...
if Joe's PB is 80m (an officially verified dive) and Bill's PB 90m (an unofficial training dive) and someone asks me "who has gone the deepest?", i would of course say Bill. i undertstand that some people might say Joe!
re: sponge diver... yes, i do believe Haggi Statti was the first person to dive to 70m (or whatever the figure was) because there is very strong evidence that he did it. "officially" he wasn't the first, but in my own personal opinion, he was...
funny arguments. goes without saying that i side with alun on this one. why should i belittle someones achievements simply because mr x. didn't sit on the bench and watch the whole show??
since i never went to a competition i never did a cw dive, cause i can't prove it. fair enough, then.
quote:
"If you are not into competing, then why do you even care what depth/time/distance you can do?"
sam, i guess that is a bit unfair, no? i'm sure you can do better than that. :hmm
roland
ps: is anyone ever thinking about credibility of an athlete or ethics of the sport?
since i never went to a competition i never did a cw dive, cause i can't prove it. fair enough, then.
quote:
"If you are not into competing, then why do you even care what depth/time/distance you can do?"
sam, i guess that is a bit unfair, no? i'm sure you can do better than that. :hmm
roland
ps: is anyone ever thinking about credibility of an athlete or ethics of the sport?
I see where you are coming from Alun - but if something is unofficial - how can you judge it as being "the absolute limit" - what is the limit? did the person do the dive and black out but live? and is that ok? did they samba but come around - is that ok? or was it totally clean? did they descend and come up but the scuba diver at the bottom inflated the lift bag because they were too narked to do it themselves? which is the limit? and if there is no judge there of any sort then how can the rest of the world tell whether or not the attempt was successful?
If we all thought like that then the fastest run mile would be done by the person whose body could cope with most performance enhancing drugs.. there have to be SOME rules and No Limits has less than anything else so why would it have been so hard for Patrick to have judges there? (to get back to the original topic!). I know quite a few judges, myself included, who would gladly have funded the trip themselves to watch a 200m dive in the sun and blue sea!
just my thoughts - it makes me angry when people say they have done something with no verification and then expect everyone to congratulate them - especially when verification would have been so easy to organise
S
If we all thought like that then the fastest run mile would be done by the person whose body could cope with most performance enhancing drugs.. there have to be SOME rules and No Limits has less than anything else so why would it have been so hard for Patrick to have judges there? (to get back to the original topic!). I know quite a few judges, myself included, who would gladly have funded the trip themselves to watch a 200m dive in the sun and blue sea!
just my thoughts - it makes me angry when people say they have done something with no verification and then expect everyone to congratulate them - especially when verification would have been so easy to organise
S
We have to be careful here. The idea of rules and regulations is to create a level playing field for people to compete on. You can judge performance A vs performance B.
This doesn't detract from the fact someone can do the depth, distance or time - I think everyone watching Tom Sietas's static performance in Vancouver can say that he did an awesome performance that was a record breaking performance at the time - but it wasn't official.
If we start recognising "unofficial" records set in training by people there is no way to judge that two performances were done under the correct conditions.
This doesn't detract from the fact someone can do the depth, distance or time - I think everyone watching Tom Sietas's static performance in Vancouver can say that he did an awesome performance that was a record breaking performance at the time - but it wasn't official.
If we start recognising "unofficial" records set in training by people there is no way to judge that two performances were done under the correct conditions.
personally i do understand all that and totally agree that regulations make results comparable. at the same time if someone does a wicked dive i do feel that some sort of appreciation is in order.
some arguments here can be interpreted in a way that patrick didn't dive to +200m. now i think that is quite unfair. where is this 'freediversarefriendlyandsupportivepeople'-attitude?
roland
ps:
quote:
"it makes me angry when people say they have done something with no verification and then expect everyone to congratulate them - especially when verification would have been so easy to organise"
sam, are you saying you never congratulate any of your dive buddies or students? or are they all diving according to full aida regulations??
some arguments here can be interpreted in a way that patrick didn't dive to +200m. now i think that is quite unfair. where is this 'freediversarefriendlyandsupportivepeople'-attitude?
roland
ps:
quote:
"it makes me angry when people say they have done something with no verification and then expect everyone to congratulate them - especially when verification would have been so easy to organise"
sam, are you saying you never congratulate any of your dive buddies or students? or are they all diving according to full aida regulations??
neoprenelove, i understand your concerns and arguments. believe it or not. but what i don't understand is, why you can't give credit or some respect to a guy's dive that wasn't sanctioned by an organisation? let's not call it 'worldrecord' and leave that for later.
i don't think this lack of appreciation is appropriate. call the man what you like for what he wrote, for his unwillingness to have judges there, or for whatever else, but at least give him the honor of a "well done, dude". unless, of course you know he faked the whole affair, which you don't or you would have posted that already.
this is all academic and doesn't lead anywhere. i'm off. have a good day all.
roland
i don't think this lack of appreciation is appropriate. call the man what you like for what he wrote, for his unwillingness to have judges there, or for whatever else, but at least give him the honor of a "well done, dude". unless, of course you know he faked the whole affair, which you don't or you would have posted that already.
this is all academic and doesn't lead anywhere. i'm off. have a good day all.
roland
What's so difficult about this?
The first person to break 100m in AIDA rules was Carlos Coste. He held the AIDA world record.
The first person to dive to 100m might have been Murat. Of course it is not "an official world record". But it's still a very impressive dive! It's up to anyone to believe it or not...From what I've read about him and from him, I find the claim very credible.
Who has the official AIDA world record in no-limits? Loic does, nothing has changed.
Who has gone the deepest in a no-limits type of dive? Patrick Musimu...
I just don't see what is unclear about this.
If someone doesn't want to compete under AIDA rules it doesn't make their dives any less impressive. It just makes then unofficial in the AIDA mindset...
Now I'm all for rules and regulations when it comes to competitions and official record attempts. I think AIDA is doing valuable work. However, I don't see why can't someone dive "outside the box", just for personal satisfaction or out of curiosity to see how deep can a man go.
If some hermit trained alone for years and ran 100m under 9 seconds, I'd be impressed even if it wasn't a competition. Who wouldn't?
The first person to break 100m in AIDA rules was Carlos Coste. He held the AIDA world record.
The first person to dive to 100m might have been Murat. Of course it is not "an official world record". But it's still a very impressive dive! It's up to anyone to believe it or not...From what I've read about him and from him, I find the claim very credible.
Who has the official AIDA world record in no-limits? Loic does, nothing has changed.
Who has gone the deepest in a no-limits type of dive? Patrick Musimu...
I just don't see what is unclear about this.
If someone doesn't want to compete under AIDA rules it doesn't make their dives any less impressive. It just makes then unofficial in the AIDA mindset...
Now I'm all for rules and regulations when it comes to competitions and official record attempts. I think AIDA is doing valuable work. However, I don't see why can't someone dive "outside the box", just for personal satisfaction or out of curiosity to see how deep can a man go.
If some hermit trained alone for years and ran 100m under 9 seconds, I'd be impressed even if it wasn't a competition. Who wouldn't?
Last edited:
there seems to be an air of bad feeling about Patrick's dives and i don't understand where it comes from. is it because he has somehow disrupted the "status quo"??
the fact that Patrick chose not to invite judges is neither here nor there as far as i'm concerned. all that matters to me is knowing that man has freedived to 200m+! judges or no judges, anyone who does that deserves congratulations and respect.
the fact that Patrick chose not to invite judges is neither here nor there as far as i'm concerned. all that matters to me is knowing that man has freedived to 200m+! judges or no judges, anyone who does that deserves congratulations and respect.
I think the "against unofficial performances" people are missing the points that have been made by the opposition in this thread. If you are a dedicated competitive natured person then you are going to compare your performances and others' to official performances. Then you have the majority of freedivers/spearfishers who dive not to prove to others what depth they have made in an official manner, but instead various reasons under various conditions, such as plain curiosity, a sense of personal satisfaction, a sense of appreciation from acquaintances/friends/family, an accomplishment of ability for function or confidence, etc... Most of these require a slap on the back by friends, make good conversation, set the next level of accomplishment, give relative projections of ability, etc... This is all that the people have been saying in this thread, so is there any reason to detract from such a common recognized practice?
Now, the big kicker is the quote:
"If you are not into competing, then why do you even care what depth/time/distance you can do?"
??????? are you kidding me and most others on this forum and in the freediving community. It is the human nature to be interested in accomplishment, ability, and speculative potential whether there is the least interest in competing or not. You don't think that every person who first made it to 20m, didn't keep that in their memory and let as many people that were interested know?! Now only a small portion of those people later take it to an official level, for the rest, many of them will push forward and keep track of their progress without taking part in competition or caring about it. It makes me angry that people would suggest such a thing is not relevant or what should be focused upon for the majority of freedivers. This activity breeds lots of people who take a personal satisfaction out of the pure enjoyment and the recognition by themselves and their friends of what they are capable of doing alone or together. That is where the true excitement and thrill comes from. The competition is a minor part that is a social gathering, request for respect, locking down of recognition, and other personal agendas.
So, as much as your arguments for competitive people are valid, you are crossing the border unfairly into the realm of those that are not doing it for the same reasons as you. For this thread to make sense, one must recognize the different approaches and the real suggestion here, that one side is talking about "recognizing" of performances towards a standard and with a defined reason in mind, whereas the other side is talking about a casual "recognizing" of performances, amongst acquaintances with the recreational and explorative reasons in mind.
Around the globe, many of us are part of local groups that work together to increase our potential, ability, and comfortability with our performances. Maybe one day it will be used for competition but until then we recognize each other and must do so in order to have confidence and train safely with each other. We share the word to comprehend who is who in the community and who may have value and experience to share in relation to ourselves. To suggest we would have no reason to keep track of our performances, unless we are doing it for competitive reason would be way out to lunch in understanding such groups and their interaction together. Anybody from the "official recognition" group getting my point?
Now, the big kicker is the quote:
"If you are not into competing, then why do you even care what depth/time/distance you can do?"
??????? are you kidding me and most others on this forum and in the freediving community. It is the human nature to be interested in accomplishment, ability, and speculative potential whether there is the least interest in competing or not. You don't think that every person who first made it to 20m, didn't keep that in their memory and let as many people that were interested know?! Now only a small portion of those people later take it to an official level, for the rest, many of them will push forward and keep track of their progress without taking part in competition or caring about it. It makes me angry that people would suggest such a thing is not relevant or what should be focused upon for the majority of freedivers. This activity breeds lots of people who take a personal satisfaction out of the pure enjoyment and the recognition by themselves and their friends of what they are capable of doing alone or together. That is where the true excitement and thrill comes from. The competition is a minor part that is a social gathering, request for respect, locking down of recognition, and other personal agendas.
So, as much as your arguments for competitive people are valid, you are crossing the border unfairly into the realm of those that are not doing it for the same reasons as you. For this thread to make sense, one must recognize the different approaches and the real suggestion here, that one side is talking about "recognizing" of performances towards a standard and with a defined reason in mind, whereas the other side is talking about a casual "recognizing" of performances, amongst acquaintances with the recreational and explorative reasons in mind.
Around the globe, many of us are part of local groups that work together to increase our potential, ability, and comfortability with our performances. Maybe one day it will be used for competition but until then we recognize each other and must do so in order to have confidence and train safely with each other. We share the word to comprehend who is who in the community and who may have value and experience to share in relation to ourselves. To suggest we would have no reason to keep track of our performances, unless we are doing it for competitive reason would be way out to lunch in understanding such groups and their interaction together. Anybody from the "official recognition" group getting my point?
Last edited:
In terms of Patrik's dives and others' AIDA unofficial performances that the word gets around about, it is simple to announce your stance upon. Every person has the ability to say their stance from two positions:
1. I do or do not believe he made the performance under the conditions the diver claimed.
2. I do or do not believe he made an official AIDA performance.
State your stance on each of those and we all know where each of us stands and it does not in the least degrade or promote the dive. It just makes it perfectly clear what the dive is to you. And that is all it ever is.
Instead some of you are treating it as though there is a mutual exclusivity between the stances. Not at all in my mind. So I ask the question, for all of you who claim we shouldn't recognize unofficial dives, are you sure you want to say because they are unofficial, the negation of #2, you now must claim the negation of #1 or that nobody should express their opinion that they stand for the positive of #1?
If you don't believe that, then what value are you actually proposing here in response to people saying they have excitement and belief that a performance occured under the claimed conditions, that are outside of any instituition's official requirements? Especially since we all are on the same wave-length that we are talking about unofficial performances.
1. I do or do not believe he made the performance under the conditions the diver claimed.
2. I do or do not believe he made an official AIDA performance.
State your stance on each of those and we all know where each of us stands and it does not in the least degrade or promote the dive. It just makes it perfectly clear what the dive is to you. And that is all it ever is.
Instead some of you are treating it as though there is a mutual exclusivity between the stances. Not at all in my mind. So I ask the question, for all of you who claim we shouldn't recognize unofficial dives, are you sure you want to say because they are unofficial, the negation of #2, you now must claim the negation of #1 or that nobody should express their opinion that they stand for the positive of #1?
If you don't believe that, then what value are you actually proposing here in response to people saying they have excitement and belief that a performance occured under the claimed conditions, that are outside of any instituition's official requirements? Especially since we all are on the same wave-length that we are talking about unofficial performances.
Last edited: