Go Herbert Go !!

[tylerz]

I think it is safe to say the "no limits" label was not intended to imply no limits in any regard. Otherwise why are they disqualifying a dive if the diver has a BO? As long as he can be resuscitated, that falls under the absolute idea of no limits!

If it was really no limits, shouldn't the rules be:
Diver goes to depth and back without any encasing gear that alleviates the sensation of pressure or supplies artificial airspace beyond a mask.

 

[Alun]

i totally agree with you Eric.

you could let things go to an extreme and let freedivers surface with no ear drums left and with crippling bends, requiring deco treatment or hospitalization... is that really freediving?

as for the phrase 'no limits', i take it to mean nolimits in terms of equipment. not nolimits to the risks you're willing to take or pain you're willing to endure.

the deeper we go the more stringent the safety requirements will have to become. if the safety starts to lag behind then we could have problems. we've seen performances increase dramatically this year and so maybe it's time these things were reviewed.

 

[tylerz]

That being said, I see validity in both sides.

I think some view the discipline is solely about how far a human can go into the deep as such and return to the surface alive and conscious. In this view, injury to whatever degree may be totally warranted. Who is to say otherwise, especially when many other sports allow broken noses, torn ligaments/tendons, broken bones, etc...

On the other hand, many participate viewing the discipline as how far a human can go into the deep as such and return to the surface none the worse off for wear. This view suggests a level of control and sensitivity to yourself. It offers up the idea that we "compete to belong". That is demonstrating that we can push our way into the deep and return knowing we were not rejected by it.

This makes me think there should be two disciplines if it really matters and that currently we have mixed and ambiguous reasons for the sport.

Summarizing the differences:

One, is brute force, possibly one time only, reaching the limits of a battle with the deep.

The other, is a demonstration that we have been created to return and have our place in the deep.

 

[efattah]

This brings up an old joke I made about 'cage-diving.'

The concept is a freediving course where everyone is guaranteed to reach 200m. Each participant is put into a steel cage with no other equipment. The cage is then forcefully lowered to 200m and then brought back to the surface. At that point, the unconscious diver has his lungs drained of blood and fluids, his eardrums are treated, he is given O2 and an IV drip, and generally resuscitated.

A week later, upon release from the hospital, he is given a video of the dive to prove he made it (since he doesn't remember anything).

Not exactly freediving in my view! But maybe such a course would have widespread acceptance and make a fortune from paying customers eager to have 200m bragging rights.

For more information, please call:
1-800-DIE-IN-THE-CAGE

 

[Bill]

At first, I was going to disagree with Eric. Picture an Olympic marathon or triathalon where the leader has an heart attack, hits the ground and his dead body is carried over the finish line by the momentum. Do you think that they would give him the gold medal. ***L he'd be considered the second greatest runner of all times. According to legend that's how the marathon got started.
Reading Eric's second post helps put the subject in the proper perspective.
Aloha
Bill

 

[Aquagenic]

Don't get me wrong, but I think E. Fattah is presenting an "Abductio Ad Absurdum". That is, a reduction to the absurd logical fallacy. No one would be willing to subject themselves to a clinic like that, nor would anyone start a clinic in which they do that. They would be quickly sued after the first death,
but if someone is willing to put themselves through that, then in my opinion, it is their decision to make.

I think that "No Limits" implies just that, that the end justifies the means. If they live through it, they get the record. If anyone is willing to subject themselves to it, the record is theirs for the taking. Any injuries are a risk they should be aware of and willing to take. Although this may not be much like the rest of freediving.

Although I like and agree with the idea of being in complete control throughout the dive, and emerging no worse for the wear, I think that is something that purists subjegate on the discipline of No Limits. In my understanding most freedivers consider No Limits as an attempt at wooing the populace and gaining media attention. Where as Constant Weight is viewed as the only 'true' discipline. If this is true, then why should we question the methods of wooing the populace, even if they do not line up with the philosophy of the rest of the sport?

These are just my quick thoughts on the subject. I have an unfathomable amount of respect for E. Fattah and all others on this board, and I do not wish to offend anyone. Continued good luck to Herbert, and safe diving to everyone...

~James

 

[Billextreme]

Just some quick info about Herbert's trainingdive.

After measured his line, and knowing that HE did a dive to the end of it, I can easy say that that training dive was around 200m.

Herbert line is 205m without stretching...
(and the current will only be max. 2m diff)

/B

 

[tylerz]

I think that "No Limits" implies just that, that the end justifies the means. If they live through it, they get the record. If anyone is willing to subject themselves to it, the record is theirs for the taking. Any injuries are a risk they should be aware of and willing to take. Although this may not be much like the rest of freediving.

Alun reminded me of my understanding of no limits as well by his statement, "as for the phrase 'no limits', i take it to mean nolimits in terms of equipment." Considering every other depth diving discipline refers to equipment utilized or lack thereof, it is certainly what no limits is referring to as well. So, utilizing the label to justify the outlook on injury is a misrepresentation.

As far as "E. Fattah is presenting an "Abductio Ad Absurdum".", this can not be so because he is not using it as an argument. He presented a joke to emphasize his feelings towards an approach in competitive diving. If one can verify he is presenting it to argue his position to conclusion as opposed to a means of provoking discomfort in the opposition, then one might be correct. :hmm

 

[efattah]

I'd like to remind people that no-limits really isn't no-limits, because as Tyler mentioned, blackouts are not allowed.

Why is a blackout not allowed, but eardrum rupture or life threatening decompression sickness allowed?

For example, in Musimu's case, he appeared to do 200m without any side effects, but suffered a likely case of DCS after his 209m dive...

 

[octopus]

I prefer "clean" dives myself. So, I would tend to agree with Eric and Alun.

However, it might be better to start a new thread, perhaps with voting options and leave this one as memento to Herbert.

 

[Alun]

Bill,
what depth did Herbert's computer record on the c200m dive?

 

[Ambra]

..........Everything was fine with this dive he did it easily!
As Bill said, training dives were much deeper,and he didin`t have problems with equalization.
-If you see underwater video,there is no chance that you can see,on Herberts face when his eardrum broke.

I think that this eardrum thing just happend on this dive,and that`s it.
This dive was more than OK.
-I was there as one of the saftey freedivers,and when you see that someone releases the lift bag,goes slowly to 15 m.,and does 30m dynamic,finning towards to judges,and surface clean with correct surface protocol........Amazing,Congratulations!

waiting Herbert,to reply and share some experience!

 

[Billextreme]

Alun,

The computer(stinger) on Herbert's training dive break totaly. Soo no computer-info from that dive.

/B

 

[miguel]

Official Web Site of Herbert Nitshc World Record Attempts?

 

[Skindiver]

While there are not too many sports where you can willingly destroy bits of yourself in order to achieve a record, i think no one willingly sacrifices any body parts to win in freediving.

A blown eardrum in deep diving, i would equate therefore with a boxer finding he has some cerebral haemmorage after a fight or a runner finding he has shin splints after a race.

These are risks of the game and neither the boxer nor the runner woud have been stripped of his title if he suffered these ailments during his attempt. An ear can go very easily , sometimes without the knowledge of the diver, and at other times badly enough that air bubbles out of the ear. I think that its too infinite to judge and the diver cannot be held responsible for this injury.

Like a boxer however, further pre attempt medicals may disqualify him from another attempt on medical grounds. So its not something to intentionally risk.

Skin.

 

[miguel]

Información Record Herbert Nitsch en Español

Visitar nuestro portal www.sportalsub.net

Link directo a la noticia

 

[michaels]

german information on http://www.tauch-sport.net

 

[Aquagenic]

I prefer "clean" dives myself. So, I would tend to agree with Eric and Alun.

However, it might be better to start a new thread, perhaps with voting options and leave this one as memento to Herbert.

I definitely agree with Octopus, lets start a new thread if we wish to continue on the definition of no limits.

One last thing...
Perhaps I misunderstood, my reply was based mainly on the phrase

Reading Eric's second post helps put the subject in the proper perspective.

presented by Bill. I was thinking that by "Eric's second post" he meant the post just above his, when in fact that was Eric's third post. If it was his second post then Bill would be saying that Eric's joke put the subject in the proper perspective, which clearly it doesn't, and that is what I was responding to.

Upon re-thinking the matter, I agree with Tylerz and Alun with the definition of the discipline "as for the phrase 'no limits', i take it to mean nolimits in terms of equipment." Considering that all other disciplines are defined by their use of equipment, no limits must be just that, no limitations upon the use of equipment (with the exception of a breathing apparatus).

My mistake! That is what I get for posting my "quick thoughts" on something. The category does make more sense when defined in terms of equipment, not in terms of technique, injury, etc.

My apologies to Eric and Bill for my misunderstanding, and my thanks to Tylerz for clearing things up. (You the man bro, once again I am impressed by your mastery of the English language)

Till Later...

~James

 

[SanSan]

Here is what I came up thinkign about the ruptutre ear drums and so on...

I think proper equalization is one of the key elements of freediving so it should be presented as such in competition and record settings, meaning that a ruptured ear drum and other pressure related injuries should be disqualified.

The same it with BO. If u get a BO ur disq because u haven shown ur up to the atempted depth as it should be with equalizing. So now there will be someone saying but he is up to it, he dove to 200m few days before. Yes but the same it is with BO. If we are talking about Herbert lets take him for another example (no offence). Im sure he did more than 107m CW in training but he had a BO in Nica thus dq him.

wow i can hardly understand what i wrote myself :duh

 

[samdive]

no idea how you would police this - sometimes doctors can't even see a perforation that as a diver you can feel.... competitions would have to take about a week if every diver had an ear exam post dive!

also not really fair - some people's ears pop open a lot easier than others..... but come on, no one really wants to rupture their eardrums - I think we just have to accept that like sinus bleeds, blood spit, CO2 headaches - they are a side effect we could do without but are just a part of life as a freediver from time to time...