How does one detect a LMC - how does one "hide" it. | DeeperBlue.com Forums
  Guest viewing is limited
  • 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!

How does one detect a LMC - how does one "hide" it.

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.

cebaztian

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2003
827
177
133
MY CLAIM IS THIS:
If athletes got better at finishing their perfomance we would only have one "borderline" LMC case out of a hundred performances.
One guy that is not given the benefit of the doubt. A price to be paid if one wants to keep LMC out of a performance.

In order to explain what I mean by "finishing of a performance in a correct way" I will first explain my understanding of what a LMC is.

WHAT A LMC IS:
1) When the brain is low on oxygen the nervoussystem will falter.
2) If a muscle is used it will ask for guidance from the brain.
3) The brain cannot send any coherent directions on how the muscle
shall proceed (move).
4) It will be a kind of on-and-of flicker of uneven signals.
5)Therefore the muscle will shake (in an UNEVEN way)

HOW TO AVOID LMC (the correct way to finish a performance)
1) When surfacing use as little muscles as possible. RELAX - FLOAT
(let the bouyancy in your suit hold you).
1a) Hang on the edge of the pool! Dont stand on your legs.
1b)Hold on to the rope with a straight arm (the only muscles working
will be your fingers) (As Herbert finishes his 87 meter dive in Ibiza).
2) Use hook-breathing (keep the pressure in your lungs).

Now you have only two muscles working:
- The diapragma breathing and your head that has to be held out of the water (if balancing the head on the spine you will only have one muscle working: the diapragma.

IT ALL COMES DOWN TO:
- If done as I propose above this is the tiny detail where LMC will have to be discovered and judged. The BREATHING!!
- This will be harder to judge than the halfsecond sway of the upper body of a standing athlete in a pool (stomach and back muscles give up on him for half a second and he falls. Could be just as little as 10 centimeters forward fall before his muscles start working again and "catches" him. And this is NOT a stumble because the athlete SHOULD NOT MOVE. Should actually not STAND at all.
- The breathing will be even harder to judge than the halfsecond dip of the head (I have felt it and seen it in others). But if the head dips it is LMC bacause the athlete SHOULD NOT MOVE. (A shiver out of could is not a dip of the head).

THE FIRST RULE IS TO MAKE IT EASY FOR THE JUDGE TO JUDGE YOU.

So to finish this of:
If the judge follows the athlete face to face up from the depth, or side by side in the pool and beeing there face to face at horisontal angle when the respiratory tracts leave the water.
The athlete may stare, have blue lips, gasp for air, cough and EVEN shiver of could. Samba will still be obvious in 99 out of a hundred cases.

HOW TO TELL SHIVERING FROM LMC
HOW TO TELL GASPING FOR AIR FROM LMC:

Shivering out of cold, gasping for air are different from LMC movements. Cold shivering is more EVEN. LMC is not. Gasping can be even but if the nevoussystem signals from the brain send UNEVEN, ERRATIC signals to the breathing muscle then breathing will be uneven - that is LMC. (Herbert N STA 2001 Ibiza). You will HEAR IT aswell as SEE it if you are experienced and CLOSE to the face. In addition to a diapragma freaking out the tounge might fall back and cause an even more uneven airflow (I have heard it many times and
felt it in myself)

I have only seen two cases that was very hard to judge. One STA 5.45 Swedish record 2000. And Herberts STA 8.08 Ibiza 2001. All other cases I have seen have been obvious. EVEN the danish guy in Ibiza doing a 360 degree horisontal circle in the water after surfacing. He was taking his mask of (he had a UW-rugby attachment). I was on the opposite side of the judges so I saw what they didnt see (they should have had a judge in the water in that situation). The guy had NO LMC but he was disqualified. That was a good judgement since the "silly sod" turned his face away from the judges directly after surfacing.
Use a normal mask, dive shallower, be in control when you surface is the message to this guy.

HOW DO WE LAERN TO JUDGE SAMBAS?
The above I have learnt by seeing sambas (LOTS - I have filmed at competitions), only marginally by experiencing them myself. When I LMC I have a memory loss, I cannot tell which muscle gave up on me or started shaking.

Just keep on watching them and you will eventually be an expert at detecting them!


Sebastian
/Sweden

PS. I have just accepted a nomination for assistand AIDA judge in Sweden. I accepted it since I believe in my (among other) abilities to detect LMC.

So, freedivers, does your experience support this or do you have arguments against it? Looking forward to hear....
 

Herbert

New Member
Sep 9, 2003
57
38
0
Excellent analysis!

I also believe that usually a LMC is quite clear to someone who has seen many, but I still believe that on one hand it will be hard to educate all the judges correctly and furthermore how should a less experienced freediver (or media) understand his DQ, if one can not even see it on the video. Or do you want to change the rule, so that the LMC has to be clear on the video (where sometimes the sound is not very good, too small or simply bad quality).

I have seen so many athletes who felt they where being treated unfair, because they just can not understand why they were disqualified. They were discouraged, crying, bitching around, frustrated, protesting quit competing (for Aida)… This doesn’t really add to the good atmosphere at a competition. It seems a lot more understandable and obvious if an athlete were disqualified because of help needed or not.

When I think back at my Ibiza 2001 static, I remember that I felt the LMC and I also saw the video. For me there was no doubt that this was a LMC. The only thing which annoyed me was the fact that I have seed other clear LMC given OK in that same competition.
 

efattah

Well-Known Member
Mar 2, 2001
3,294
487
173
My experience is that:

1. LMC does not occur in muscles which you are trying to move, it can also occur in muscles which you are not moving, so 'trying not to move' is not going to help much
2. High blood acidity causes nerve impulses to get confused, resulting in 'CO2 jitters' which can last up to 5 minutes after the static, and this shakiness has nothing to do with hypoxic LMC
3. LMC is only a symptom of the hypoxic brain. Instead of trying to carefully see if the athlete has the SYMPTOMS of a hypoxic brain, why not analyze the CAUSE of the LMC, mainly the brain itself? This is the approach we used when working on our new rule suggestions we will publish soon.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada
 

cebaztian

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2003
827
177
133
Thank you Herbert. Since you are an expert at "finishing a performance" efficiently I am not surprised by your apraisal.

But, I think Eric is right. LMC can occur in a muscle that is not moving or asked to used. But I think it is much less likely.

It is also most likely true what Eric says that "High blood acidity causes nerve impulses to get confused, resulting in 'CO2 jitters'"

But this I think is an exception. And it is also a "loss of motor control" even though not caused by hypoxia or hypoxemia (low oxygen in brain especially).
The case (previously described by Eric) with someone blacking out during the first stages of a breathhold due to high pressure on the lungs from overpacking; is also an exception.

AND ONE CAN NOT BASE A RULE ON EXCEPTIONS.

I would say that the normal case is what I described in my first post. But I think Eric will claim that the exceptions are so many that athletes are beeing misjudged all the time. I dont think so. Stay in control and you will be OK. Be tired, breath, stare, have blue lips (face the judge) - BUT BE IN CONTROL of your movements and you will pass.

But Eric and others are really making me curious about this new suggestion. Is a oxymeter involved....?


/Sebastian, Sweden
 

efattah

Well-Known Member
Mar 2, 2001
3,294
487
173
Sebastien,

Stay in control, breathe, stare, and 'you will pass'?? NO!

That's the whole problem. In switzerland in 2000 I saw a french girl come up from 5 minutes in static. Regular breathing, NO shaking, NO moving, staring into space for the first few breaths, then looking and giving the okay sign. The judge said it was good, but Sebastien Nagel had been 'wandering' around the area and immediately shouted to the judge 'NO! NO! Samba. Samba!' And the girl was disqualified. Why? No shaking, no moving, regular breathing, staring into space a bit.

I have heard this happens all the time (perhaps it was the same with Silvia Da Pon?)


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada
 

cebaztian

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2003
827
177
133
So maybe that´s it, Eric. The first stage of LMC (its even before the tiny uneven signs of a faltering breathing, or the twich in your leg) - first sign of "LOSS OF CONTROL".

THE STARE INTO SPACE!

Let me tell you a story...
It starts at 30 meter when I turn at the bottom at Hemmoor cup 2000. But I dont swim straight up, I stop and wave at the camera and make a few signs since I know its a direct live line to shore where I know my friends are looking. At 25 I stop again because I FEEL great. I collect my tag that has been caught at 25.
I dont remember surfacing. I just remember beeing there with perfect motor control, tag in hand, BUT I have no idea where the judge is, which direction to turn. A few seconds later I realize the guy I am trying to give the tag is the doctor and he and others are pointing at the judge 90 degrees to my left. But I still try to give the doctor the tag.
No samba signs but my confused gaze told them that this guy has NO CLUE ON what he is doing. DQ and rightly so if one believes in controlled dives.

But this leads us back to the guy with the stary wide open eyes. He better turn the right direction upon surfacing. But hopefully the judges have seen the guy in the face before and knows what he looks like.

In text it would be easy to ridcule this statement - THAT A SIMPLE UNFOCUSED STARE WILL DISQUALIFY YOU.
 

cebaztian

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2003
827
177
133
Oops hit the send button by mistake (slight loss of control)...

To end the above...
In a conversation or just in a situation when you want someones attention there are very small details that will tell you that the other person are not with you - not conecting, maybe looking straigth at you but is NOT there, thoughts and focus are somewhere else. Again I claim that this is (not easy) but spotable by an experienced judge.

I havent read the AIDA list of LMC signs lately (I have seen one list describing LMC signs and another describing signs of fatigue - which are OK) but I think that STARE actually is part of the LMC signs. Question is if that is enough by itself.

I wish some AIDA judges would join so that we coluld narrow it down to that tiny detail, where the athlete will NOT get the benefit of the doubt.

Sebastian
/Sweden "trying vigorously to defend the sambarule"

PS Excellent idea someone had that all athletes have the right to a description of their LMC - DQ
 

efattah

Well-Known Member
Mar 2, 2001
3,294
487
173
Originally posted by cebaztian

Be tired, breath, stare, have blue lips (face the judge) - BUT BE IN CONTROL of your movements and you will pass.

The athlete may stare, have blue lips, gasp for air, cough and EVEN shiver of could. Samba will still be obvious in 99 out of a hundred cases.


Why do you change your mind so quickly? First you say staring is okay, then you say it is not.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada
 

tylerz

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2002
733
114
133
"But this I think is an exception. And it is also a "loss of motor control" even though not caused by hypoxia or hypoxemia (low oxygen in brain especially). " - Sebastien

I can not see how that is a reasonable statement since it is well understood that "contractions" are involuntary and can occur after one starts breathing. So is it a samba while the static is occurring if you are calling that a "loss of motor control"? If not then why is it as soon as you show your face?
Beginning to breath does not inform your body that it can return to normal. It is the actual state of the body that determines this. Therefore, as Eric mentions, acidic blood is a large factor in what the body decides to do and this does not change until the ratio of CO2/O2 in the blood returns to a state the body agrees with. The breathing just initiates the sequence of events in the system that allow this to occur.

"The case (previously described by Eric) with someone blacking out during the first stages of a breathhold due to high pressure on the lungs from overpacking; is also an exception." - Sebastien

It is not clear to me what you are meaning by "an exception". If you are meaning that it is rare, then I have to disagree. While practicing breath-holds last winter, I would samba at the beginning of my breath-hold 50% of the time if not more when I packed. I was doing breath-holds on average 4 times a week, achieving 8:07. I say that to express that I was not new to breath-holds or packing.

More importantly, to your last post saying, "trying vigorously to defend the sambarule", why are you doing this? Do you believe so strongly that it is the essence of a wonderful rule? It seems that you are afraid of losing this rule for something better? It has already been pointed out countless times that there is the potential of better/safer rules. Countless posts by countless people have shown the lack of general faith in the current rule. All the arguments show that at best 50% of the time the current samba rule works to provide safety and demonstrate athlete control, but that still leaves the other 50% of the time, which people are sharing all the stories about. Maybe it is 70%, 30%. That is still not very good especially in the name of safety and fairness.

Everybody on both sides has made some clear understandable statements, but at the end of the day I was not under the impression that this is about whether we can make clear statements for our side or your side to win. I thought it was about being safer and fairer. So I would say the only person who should be defending something is the person who feels safety is being threatened or injust statements are occurring. Yes, no?
If we were to gather all the statements made for the samba rule and all those that make note of trouble with the samba rule, ideally would we not weigh the two lists out and if there was not a 90% or more weight to the samba rule, then it would be apparent we need to assess some alternatives? If you can agree with that statement, then I think you can go through all the statements and perform this comparison quite clearly now. And I think it is quite clear that it is not a 90% or more weight in favor of the samba rule. Not meaning opinions, but the facts that have been shared that lead to a better understanding of athlete state and how the current rule relates to that.
 

derelictp

Freediver
Oct 16, 2001
397
63
118
53
If hiding a samba will be an important skill in competitive freediving I am not at all interested in competing.

Obviosly I don't like the rule like it is now.

One way is to make it stricter and another way is to make it like laminar said "free airways.

Most important is that the rule is clearer!
 
Last edited:

cebaztian

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2003
827
177
133
It is sad thing that the sambarule divides the freediving community. How many on each side I do not know. But I know that AIDA (all countries representatives) has voted on the rule and a majority is for the sambarule.

TYLERZ; I think when it comes down to it - most freedivers dont like the subjectivness in the sambarule BUT wants to keep LMC out so they support it until something better comes along. I do at least.

I dont think they are saying that the sambarule is the best thing there ever was - there just isnt any alternative (right now) if one wants to keep LMC out of competition.

This thread is not about if it is good or bad to have the sambarule. Not even if it is morally good or bad to have a samba. I want to hear from the community possible ways to improve detection of LMC. To understand it more.
And yes ERIC, I might change views (on stare and other things). I discuss to learn. But I am giving the subject a great deal of thoughts these days (because of this thread and your input).

It all comes down to do a controlled dive. Some say ; "as long as the athlete keeps the airways out of water its OK" (How about a short dip of the airways some swallowed water, coughing and then back to normal). A line will always have to be drawn by a judge (if we dont start using oxymeters....)

Hell not even FREE like the LMC (most of their records seems to be without them (I visited two records at FREE and they where perfectly clean). I heard that Yasemin once was DQ even though she delivered the tag at the surface according to FREE rules but then she BO and I guess the FREE people didnt like the look of it and DQ´d her (a lot of media and sponsors at her records watching).
(but this has to be checked - Rudi wrote it once I think).

TYLERZ and yes by exceptions I of course mean rare cases. And you having BO out of packing at TRAINING wont change that. A majority of high level athletes has had BO due to packing in training but very few during comeptition. And you can keep lining up cases, and apparent misjudging. The fact is (although a lot of bitching about the sambarule) the system works - competitions are beeing organized, athletes are coming (I dont see no boycot) - judges are getting better...

As I have said before - as a freediver I am happy to compete under any rule Aida or FREE. But looking at the total picture I dont want to see more LMC and BO cases in competitions because I dont think the sport will grow in this way. You know the arguments for this (the public, media, sponsors).

And Aida is growing, and freediving is growing, and there are more and more competitions.
AIDA wants to keep LMC and uncontrolled dives out of competition AND at the same time pursue safety and fairness. And some sacrifice has to be done - thats life.
So where is the alternative more FAIR rule that still keeps LMC out of a accepted performance. I am not smart enough to come up with it. Are you?

Sebastian
/Sweden

But again; I started this thread to discuss what a LMC is and looks like. Not to start throwing old arguments against each other and refering to cases years back when freediving competition was newborn.

PS. By "hiding", PETER, I mean taking control, doing the right thing - steps to avoid LMC. The world record holders of Aida has learnt this. Kirk Krack teaches it in his clinics. It is not in any way cheating. It is playing the rules - avoiding LMC. It is a fine line when you are close and you can stay on the right side with the right actions. Not the best frazing of words I admit but you seem to be happy to missunderstand and foresee the "" around the word hide.

Safe freediving to you all. And remember our mutual passion for beeing under water - there are more that links us than divides us.
 

donmoore

New Member
Aug 19, 2002
958
154
0
60
Sebastian,
What I disagree with in your statements, for discussion sake only, is the view that the closer AIDA can get to detecting all LMC’s - the better. It sounds like your trying to detect the earliest, subjective stages of it. It seems to me, and I think others would agree, that the closer you get to detecting all LMC’s the more subjective your going to be.

A foundation of British law is a person is innocent until they are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This is because, in a free society, the value of not finding an innocent person guilty is more important than convicting all guilty people.

You said the thread is not about if its “morally good or bad to have a samba”. I don’t think we can have a good objective rule without consider this. As freedivers we don’t believe samba/LMC have negative health effects. Samba/LMC is the defining limit to what we try to do. In our attempts to stop just short of this limit, sometimes we are going to go over. Every competition is going to have them.

If we don’t believe it is unhealthy or immoral, then why are we trying to detect it so early that not even a video camera can pick it up? The argument for publicity, media sake is a poor one, if it can’t be detected on their equipment or to an untrained eye or ear. If the media really want to film and show LMC’s, Sambas, and BO’s they will always have opportunities at every major freediving event.

Why not change the definition to where a LMC is declared a LMC when it is obvious? As you stated in the FREE events, even where LMC by itself does not result in a DQ, most performances didn’t show any signs of it. Do you really think that a performance that resulted in a possible LMC, but was not clear enough to be ruled a LMC without doubt, is going to give the competitor a meaningful advantage? Records have been broken this year by multiple meters and 10’s of seconds. How many less meters or seconds would it have taken for a LMC that was in its earliest, subjective stage, to be a non-LMC?

Maybe their would actually be less LMC/sambas if competitors knew they were going to be given the shadow of doubt and did not have to worry so much about their appearance.

I have great respect for Kirk Krack and his teaching. I just went to his clinic, but the teaching of what to do on the recovery isn’t just how to avoid an LMC. We were told to get in habit of doing the same thing each time, so that if we did have a slight samba, we would probably continue with the routine and it might not be detectable. This is great advice, taught by masters, but its not just avoiding LMC, it’s also how to cover it up. Should a person who is a better actor not get DQ over someone that isn’t? I guess it depends which person I am! But truthfully I would rather everyone be judged in the most objective way possible.

I too am curious to what Eric Fattah is going to suggest, but the idea of an oxymeter (he hasn’t said this) bothers me. Who is to say that the level of O2 that causes a samba in one person is the same in all people? Does anyone remember the 100-meter sprint final in the 1996 Olympics when the track and field governing body decided it was humanly impossible for anyone to react with in given amount of time of the gun and programmed their timing devices to DQ anyone who didn’t start until after this time lapsed? A British runner false started twice and swore he didn’t react until he heard the gun. It was an ugly spectacle.

I don’t mean to be attacking you, just joining in the constructive conversation of the thread that you encouraged.
don
 

derelictp

Freediver
Oct 16, 2001
397
63
118
53
Seb:
I'm not at all happy to missunderstand and I don't think that I have done so. And for me there is no rights or wrongs just an argumentation which may lead to something better.

No offense, I just want to say my opinion which offcourse can change if there is good arguments!!;)

I am just trying to say that I as a person don't want to put a lot of energy in my training on trying to look good or avoid what is defined of some organisation as LMC or Samba. If that is a part of the competition I rather only train and focus on getting a better and safer diver "in reality" than to compete and make the judges in some competition accept the way I look!

P.S: Lycka till på rekordförsöket i helgen!!!
 
Last edited:

efattah

Well-Known Member
Mar 2, 2001
3,294
487
173
Originally posted by donmoore
Sebastian,
A foundation of British law is a person is innocent until they are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This is because, in a free society, the value of not finding an innocent person guilty is more important than convicting all guilty people.

For years, this is what I have been fighting for.

For those who say they are fighting to 'develop the sport', remember one thing:

- Each time an innoncent freediver is convicted as 'guilty', we permanently lose a diver, and sometimes an entire country (i.e. Italy & Silvia Da Pon)

- Each time a 'guilty' diver escapes watchful eyes, the guilty diver will continue to compete

This is why it is more important to NOT convict innocent divers, rather than to convict all the guilty ones.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada
 
Last edited:

efattah

Well-Known Member
Mar 2, 2001
3,294
487
173
Using an oximeter would not be fair to freedivers. It would be like measuring the lactate level in a muscle and telling a runner he must stop the race now because his lactate level is too high. If he can withstand the lactic acid and keep running, good for him.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada
 

cebaztian

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2003
827
177
133
DONMOORE
Thanks for the tone in your reply - I dont feel attacked.
I am here to discuss - not to argue (if you see the dfference). And it seems like any talk of the sambarule makes alot of people furious and they loose a sensible tone of voice. Unfortunately we cannot hear the tone of voice in our mails and missunderstand each other alot.

You said:
"It sounds like your trying to detect the earliest, subjective stages of it. It seems to me, and I think others would agree, that the closer you get to detecting all LMC’s the more subjective your going to be.

I have to think about that. But you are right. What I want to discuss is WHAT IS A LMC - WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE - HOW DO WE DETECT IT. So naturally I am looking for the earliest stage. That stage should be a easily detectable one otherwise I think the athlete should be given the benefit of the doubt.
Blank stare - irregular breathingpattern... somewhere there. One has to have seen many LMC to recognice these things, and I have seen many of them.

If you want to put forth arguments forto take away the LMCrule - there is another discussionthread for that (see you there).

ERIC
I might not be spot on in my wording (I am not native in english) but I actually didnt change my mind about staring. I put forth the question if there is an easily detected difference between staring AT someone or staring blank unfocused.

And this DONMOORE doesnt have to be 100% subjective. If we put forth 50 blank stares mixed with 50 focused stares. 3 good judges might only argue about 1-2 cases. Or am I being to positive? (As I have said before, a price to pay for keeping LMC out of competition, if one wants that).

VIDEO "not even a camera can see"
I can assure you and I do know what I am talking about. The human eye is much more accurate than any DV camera. This is why a judge always can overrule the camera (as I understand the AIDA rules).

ERIC. Athletes are not leaving the AIDAcompetitions - they are getting bigger and bigger. It is not that hard to arrange a competition. Are there any more competitions that the dolphin cup that is not associated with AIDA. I think it would be intresting to see more of them.

And the LMC rule is developing (just compare competitions in the past with today). But maybe it will never get to the FAIRNESS level accepted by everyone. But if one is looking for the utopia - one will only get bitter.
Even brittish law and many sports are judged by some part of subjectiveness. Innocent people are condemned every day.


Sebastian
/Sweden... trying to be part of a solution for fairer/better judging

PS. Now I have to focus on getting the FLU out of my body before this weekend when I am trying to beat an old untouched national record DNF. After that I am judging Lotta Ericson trying to beat two of her own national records STA DYN.
 

tylerz

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2002
733
114
133
Sebastian - "TYLERZ; I think when it comes down to it - most freedivers dont like the subjectivness in the sambarule BUT wants to keep LMC out so they support it until something better comes along. I do at least."

I totally agree with this!

Sebastian - "I dont think they are saying that the sambarule is the best thing there ever was - there just isnt any alternative (right now) if one wants to keep LMC out of competition. "

I agree to the part where you say that people are not "saying the sambarule is the best thing". There are alternatives but it appears that there are a lot of people who have a say in the rules and those close to such people that are not exploring the alternatives proactively to come up with an overall BETTER solution.

And before anybody assumes that all I am doing is bashing (although I have not generated such a post) the sambarule, I have not further suggested a solution so far because I have been an integral part of determining potential improved solutions with Eric Fattah and Pete Scott. So I could have only repeated what they have said. Which is, we are almost done putting it down in a way that will make sense to everybody else, so it can be explored further. There seems to be discontent with this fact amongst posters as well who suggest it should be shared. Well honestly!! Look back through the posts and you will see a trend; that if an idea is not clearly expressed then it will not be understood or considered very thoroughly. We have even experienced this between one another, as the three of us discovered some of these potential solutions. So please be understanding and considerate.

Sebastian - "This thread is not about if it is good or bad to have the sambarule. Not even if it is morally good or bad to have a samba. I want to hear from the community possible ways to improve detection of LMC. To understand it more."

This is totally reasonable, yet if you make a bunch of statements for us to read in your posts, and we disagree with the ideas and concepts that you appear to be building upon to take your stance so far, then you have to understand that we think this as well is important to address, in the hopes that we all are working with the same information and as many clear perspectives as have been discovered. This relates to what you are saying in that some people directly address your query for improving detection of LMC, but some of us are addressing the statements you make around that, which we assume you have said because they are important to you. Feel free to ask me for examples if you do not understand.

Sebastian - "TYLERZ and yes by exceptions I of course mean rare cases."

Thanks for the clarification.

Sebastian - "And you having BO out of packing at TRAINING wont change that. A majority of high level athletes has had BO due to packing in training but very few during comeptition."

I do not see how you drew this conclusion? Have you queried a number of "high level athletes" about this specifically? This appears to be a very subjective conclusion. Feel free to explain how I am incorrect. I suspect, it is statements that you make such as this, that draw a lot of feedback and statements from us. Yet these seem to be the feedback that you are classifying as "bitching/complaining" and "throwing old arguments". I ensure you (I as a native english speaker), that the majority of the statements that have been made in response to your posts are attempts at clarifying and solidifying the full picture around the concepts and ideas expressed within your posts.

Sebastian - "And you can keep lining up cases, and apparent misjudging. The fact is (although a lot of bitching about the sambarule) the system works " and "And it seems like any talk of the sambarule makes alot of people furious"

In one sentence you are saying you are a happy, constructive, discussionist, looking for positive feedback, and in the next sentence you are accusing those who believe they are attempting to do the same (and I dare say "are"), as people who are "bitching" and "furious". So I do not get how one becomes a non-bitcher and non-furious person in your eyes? I am sorry to imply a little sarcasm there but I have made every one of my posts WITHOUT emotion strictly based on experience, thoughts, and attempts to clarify what APPEARED to be YOUR misunderstandings, lack of perspective, and LACK of exploring with the rest of us. Every statement I made specified clearly what I was trying to address and further explored thoughts I believe to be helpful in giving us all more perspective. Never did I repeat somebody else. Never did I accuse anybody. Yet as you have stated so many times, maybe there is a language barrier. So does that not imply that maybe instead of just assuming some of us do not understand you and your TONE, maybe you have mistaken ours. I know you have mistaken mine. If you already understood this, THEN WONDERFUL. How about you try to learn how to stop implying that anybody who responds to your posts is doing so with "bad intent" and "lack of focus". And look for the GOOD focus that they are most likely intending.

Once again, you can call this post of mine "bitching", but it is intended to be an explanation that may assist you in getting your DESIRED responses as well assist in minimizing your desire to express misplaced discontent with so many people who are posting in response to your statements and other's. I think that is only fair since you are an influence to other readers, who will use your accusations to form pictures of those you accuse, even your misguided ones.

Words are difficult to get our meaning across in person, extra-difficult to get across in short written statements, extra-extra-difficult to get across when assumptions are being drawn easily. Try asking further questions of those people you suspect do not understand you, or are providing seemingly irrelevant information. This should allow you to get closer to a real tone and closer to understanding posters. I can tell you nobody is going to understand or appreciate you leaving a post targetting a specific person and concluding with an unjustified and accusative statement about them. Look back at other people's posts and you will see most of them ask you what you think and only say what it APPEARS your are saying/implying/thinking! That is, as well, a form of open-ended question that says we are interested in understanding something that APPEARS to not be correct or complete.

Hope this lends some perspective and I hope we can all type constructively together again with minimal assumptions, especially on character and NO FINALIZED accusations.

If you are in doubt of anything I have stated, please ask me. I enjoy exploring and clarifying.

I am extremely sorry this does not directly relate to hiding LMC. I hope you understand.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Shadowkiller

cebaztian

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2003
827
177
133
controlled dives

Well Tylerz, you and I might be the only ones left in this discussion. And now we are spending time discussing how to discuss. And I must say I am sorry for having to clarify myself - I should be more precise in the first place (the word bitching is probably stronger than I am aware of)

When saying that alot of people get furious, and bitch and keep on repeating old arguments I am refering to the discussion as it has been OVER THE YEARS not only in this thread. And it probably goes for people on both sides of the argument.

I have no problem seeing the injustice and the malpractice of the sambarule (specially looking back) but I try to see a possibility for it to survive (because I dont want to see more LMC and BO than necessary in media).
If there is a better solution I am all ears.
---
I dont think we have to make a scientific study to agree on that there are more LMC and BOs during training than in competitions (do you have one that says the opposite). So you having a BO after packing to much (we all have those things) and manage to hide it and wake up and continue your static wont make me change my mind on the LMC rule. And most people who faint after packing let go of their air and would get DQ in a comp.

You push your limits in training - and try to make an accepted dive in a competition. I have seen more competitions performances than most people since I have filmed at the line at Ibiza and Hawaii and at smaller national competitions. And naturally over the years I have talked to loads of athletes that confirm this statement of mine.

Not even Eric claiming to have LMC in his legs that are not detectable all the time is a strong argument for a malfunctioning rule. If he is in control an there is no LOSS OF MOTOR CONTROL on the outside - well then it is OK - he is in control.

I mean what else can we do but to have three judges staring at the athlete looking for signs of him not beeing in control. If they dont see anything they dont see anything.
And I do know that some judges see very very small things (heard nasty stories from the Cuprys comp) ANd because of that I think it is a marvelous idea to make it obligatory for the judge to state in what way the LMC expressed itself (in writing).

---
I am a bit surprised I find myself alone with three antiLMCrule guys in this thread. Initially Herbert N said something good about my first post but from then I have been alone. I makes me think maybe you are right - no one wants to defend the LMC rule.

But still you guys have not questioned any of the following;

1) AIDA competitions are getting bigger and bigger and more and more of them.
2) FREE does mostly clean performances and has even DQ one BO even though the tag was delivered.
3) Aida has voted on the LMC rule. Aida countries want to keep it (as long as nothing better comes up)
4) Judging is getting better and athletes are behaving more rational after performances.

And two other things none of you commented:

5) If we put forth 50 blank stares mixed with 50 focused stares. 3 good judges might only argue about 1-2 cases. Or am I being to positive? (As I have said before, a price to pay for keeping LMC out of competition, if one wants that).
IF this is true that 3 judges can agree on something like this - then the LMCrule is not 100% subjective. One could almost say it is objective.

6) Someone was irritaded beeing DQ on something "not even a camera can see"
The human eye is much more accurate than any DV camera. This is why a judge always can overrule the camera (as I understand the AIDA rules).
But a twitching eye (I think this was the example) might be a sign of a lot of things that is not LMC.

Sebastian /Sweden

And I must stress that I do appreciate your posts and experiences told in this thread.
 

st3fan

cu @ the bottom
Nov 2, 2002
85
21
98
I have seen so many athletes who felt they where being treated unfair, because they just can not understand why they were disqualified. They were discouraged, crying, bitching around, frustrated, protesting quit competing (for Aida)… This doesn’t really add to the good atmosphere at a competition. It seems a lot more understandable and obvious if an athlete were disqualified because of help needed or not.(HN)

I don't think Herbert is defender of the LMC rule....
 
DeeperBlue.com - The Worlds Largest Community Dedicated To Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing

ABOUT US

ISSN 1469-865X | Copyright © 1996 - 2021 deeperblue.net limited.

DeeperBlue.com is the World's Largest Community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving, Spearfishing and Diving Travel.

We've been dedicated to bringing you the freshest news, features and discussions from around the underwater world since 1996.

ADVERT