New rules discussion

[jome]

(continued discussion from the CIPA open thread)

I think the new rules are far from perfect regarding LMC, but it's (maybe) on the right path. We tried the rules in the Finnish nationals also, and the amount of LMCs was exceptionally high. But I wouldn't say it's solely because of the rules...I think it's more because each year we have more and more divers that are pushing their physiological limit, where as a couple of years back, there was only a couple of guys capable of doing 100+ in dynamic etc and performances were mostly limited by the ability to withstand the urge to breathe. I truly believe we would've seen these guys samba even with the old rules. I also think that we'll see an increase in sambas in high profile competitions regardless of the rules in the future just because more and more people are reaching (or thinking they are a top competitive level, where the performance is always taken to the limit. You can't blame the rules if you let your self go too far...Controlling that is your own responsibility.

What competitors need to realize is that nothing for them has changed. You can't go in a competition and think that "hmm, I can add 15 meters now because of the new rule". I'd say anyone who hits a serious samba will have trouble completing the protocol. You still have to aim your performace to end before samba, not "after I feel samba, I can make a few more kicks". A serious samba is so close to BO that there's no such athlete that can flirt with samba and reliably "control" it. Some will try and get DQd and in the next competition they know what I already know. Competitions are won by people giving reliable performances in each dicipline, not by taking it further by a few meters or seconds and getting DQd. It may take some time for this realisation to "sink in" for people, so I think these rules need more than one competition of experience to be truly evaluated. We need to see people doing 2-3 competitions under these rules to truly see what the effect is (in the first one they learn that no, you really cannot push your self to a serious samba if you want to complete the protocol).

The sambas I saw that were DQd would not have passed, new rules or old rules. And the one's I saw passed were mostly such minor sambas, that for me there's no problem accepting those. But there were a few that were so so. For example one performance, where the athlete comes up, has a clear samba and "nods off" for a couple of seconds, but the head is supported on the side of the pool, never touching water...I guess this is ok by the new rules, since that person did come around and do the protocol in 20 seconds. It clearly should not be, so some adjusments are clearly needed.

Also something that looks really stupid is people coming up so bad that they can barely lift their hand and trying to give an ok sign. With the old rules, they knew they we're screwed, so they'd just give up.

Now it is true that when talking about world championship level performances, where every second and meter counts, with the new rules some top athletes will have to "learn to samba". This is pretty dangerous, if you consider that these guys will then be pushed to push to samba in training every time and trying to learn to control it. Then again, learning to "hide samba" is nothing new and the results we see vary... (I claim again that relaible control of samba is impossible to learn. Just because you luck out a few times does not mean it's reliable)

My humble opinnion is that the new rules have potential, but the surface protocol has to be further fine tuned, to such a complexity that it will be impossible to complete it with any visible samba. This will take time and experience to realise, but if that happens then truly nothing has changed for the athlete, except the subective criteria for samba will be eliminated. I've said it before and I'm saying it again. The objective of the rules changes is not to "allow samba", that's just the way most people choose to see it. It is to "remove subjective criteria for samba". A step has been taken towards this, but more steps are needed before that objective is realized. If these rules are allowed to mature and develop, that goal is possible in my opinnion, with a surface protocol that is impossible to complete with clear samba. What will this be? I have no idea...Any good ideas, I'm sure, are welcome.

I'd have to agree with Eric about nationals making exceptions to the rules. It's not fair play for everybody. If there's a fault in the rules, it should be adjusted on an international level, or else the whole AIDA concept is kind of pointless...Most countries must've voted "yes", because the rules are effect. If they want to reverse their decision, it should be through the same process (another vote on the matter). This is my opinnion as a private person, not to be affiliated with AIDA finland (which, last I heard, is looking at the same solution as CAFA and USAA)

 

[samdive]

no one has yet mentioned the other big change to the rules - that if you have your own coach in the water, you can have taps whenever you want during the static - or indeed no taps at all... this for me is even more serious with quite a large danger potential if the athlete decides not to have any taps.

The athlete I coached in Nice who did have a BO HAD decided to have taps but there was still some confusion over whether I as the coach, should pull him up when he was clearly in trouble, or whether the official safety diver should do it. In the end I signalled the safety diver to do it as I thought it would be his role but he just looked at me blankly so I did it myself... this needs clarification in the rules.

Not having to have any taps at all also makes the whole business of subscribing a time for static pretty pointless - I am surprised that we did not get more 1 min subscriptions in Nice as a result.

S

 

[teppo]

How it is possible, not having taps? Rules say, that coach may tap the athlete. I understand, the organizers safety makes the taps anyway.
Also the main responsibility as safety is the organizers safety freediver.

Seems there has been some confusion with the new rules.
See the new rules ver 11.1, §6.10 and §6.14

 

[naiad]

I am mostly happy with the new rules. I haven't competed yet, but I feel more confident about it knowing that I am less likely to be disqualified unfairly.

The main problem that I can see is having to say "I am OK" soon after surfacing. This might be impossible simply because the athlete is too out of breath. I have been a spotter to people who are too exhausted to say anything, but they are clearly nowhere near LMC.

I would find this particularly difficult in dynamic, despite the fact that I am hardly ever seriously out of breath after static or dynamic, even when I am near the limit.

Has anyone else got experience with this?

Lucia

 

[teppo]

You have 20 seconds to perform the surfacing protocol, and thats quite a long time.
Look this guy (click Roobert DNF end):
http://www.freedivingfinland.net/nu...e=Downloads&file=index&req=viewdownload&cid=1
He manages the procedure in 13 seconds, with heavy breathing.
This video is taken before the new rules, so he is not saying "I'm ok", but there would have been enough time for saying.

 

[Jason Billows]

I have many problems with the new rules and hope that CAFA will be taking steps to modify them for our National competitons.

I think that one major point that has been overlooked is public perception. Most of us would agree that the growth of the sport will only come with more public support, getting people involved, finding an audience, etc.

If we allow performances with samba to be viewed as okay, I think it will only turn others off of the sport in the long run. It's difficult trying to help the general public understand sambas and what is really happening physiologicaly, but by allowing those performances to be considered clean will make the job that much more difficult in my opinion.

my 2 cents.

 

[subaquaticus]

I was disqualified :ban in static at the CIPA Open :waterwork .

The reason given was that I had made the sign "OK" and said "I am OK" simultaneously ! Before I had taken off properly my goggles and my nose-clip...

I was surprised at such severity all the more since I could see at least three other athletes, and not the most insignificant ones making the same "mistake" and not being eliminated in the least...

Since my perf was very low (3'10") I did not want to make any fuss, but if I had done a better time, I would probably have protested...

I saw one athlete simply forgetting to say "I am OK" ; then her coach said "I am OK" and the athlete repeated "I am OK" and was validated...

What do you think about eliminating somebody because of the simultaneity of the OK sign and the saying "I am OK" ?

and if there are such strict rules they should apply fairly to everybody and with no external help, shouldn't they ?

 

[Jason Billows]

Personally I think that is ridiculous. If you preform the required motions I don't see the rationale behind not being able to do them simultaneously.

 

[Veronika]

I think paying attention to doing it in the correct order is a task in itself. It is not the same level of taskload if you are allowed do it in any order or if you have to do it in the correct order. So I guess the background was the thought that people sambaing would not be able to do the correct procedure anymore.

 

[subaquaticus]

Personally I think that is ridiculous. If you preform the required motions I don't see the rationale behind not being able to do them simultaneously.

??? I did not understand your point... what were you trying to say ?

simultaneously doing the sign OK and saying "I am OK" was the cause of the elimination...

Simultaneity seems the most natural way... it seems quite unnatural not saying "I am Ok" while doing the sign...

 

[efattah]

Once again we see people thinking that the new rules are designed to 'allow' sambas. Not true.

The reason the new rules even came to existence was because of a great observation by Claude Chapuis:
- If the public does not understand why the athlete was disqualified, then the sport is in trouble

This is true in many cases with the old rules; for example, Stig Severinsen's 204m dynamic apnea swim, with such an incredibly micro samba that no normal person could ever have seen it. To disqualify him in front of a large audience would be extremely detrimental to the growth of the sport. I challenge anyone to watch that video and say that his disqualification helps the growth of the sport.

In order to DQ someone for a samba, the samba must be so obvious that even a dumbass spectator can understand that the guy is in trouble.

THAT is the purpose of the new rules, to make DQ's clear to the public. Whether or not they achieve that is still under question, but it is important to understand why they came into existence.

If they do not achieve their purpose (which will take time to tell), then a new democratic process should begin. Having 'rogue' nations go it alone is not the solution.

 

[subaquaticus]

I think paying attention to doing it in the correct order is a task in itself. It is not the same level of taskload if you are allowed do it in any order or if you have to do it in the correct order. So I guess the background was the thought that people sambaing would not be able to do the correct procedure anymore.

Suppose you are at the arrival of a 10 000 m running race... Ask every athlete within 20 seconds of their arrival to :

1. do the OK sign ;

2. say "I am OK"...

I think that a non negligible proportion of the athletes will do this in the wrong order or simultaneously (because it is the most natural way !)... or exceed the time allowed....

as far as I know sambas and black outs are exceptional after a 10 000 m running race...

 

[derelictp]

I agree with Veronika about that the order is important.

I think we should not allow coaches to help the athletes, the athlete should have such control that he/she know what to do.

I think the judges should demand a very strict executed protocol.

 

[efattah]

One more point.

Since 1998 I have followed the yearly vote on the AIDA rules.

Many times I was unhappy with the result of the vote.

Each time I continued to compete under the AIDA rules, even if I was unhappy with them.

This is how the process is supposed to work. If you are unhappy with the new rules, then I'm sorry to say that it is your problem. You have two choices:
1. Accept the new rules and use them, keeping in mind they may change again next year (for better or for worse)
OR
2. Leave AIDA and create a new, different, freediving organization.

 

[derelictp]

I agree with efattah,

To give the new rules a fair chance we must accept it and give it some time.

 

[subaquaticus]

Once again we see people thinking that the new rules are designed to 'allow' sambas. Not true.

The reason the new rules even came to existence was because of a great observation by Claude Chapuis:
- If the public does not understand why the athlete was disqualified, then the sport is in trouble

This is true in many cases with the old rules; for example, Stig Severinsen's 204m dynamic apnea swim, with such an incredibly micro samba that no normal person could ever have seen it. To disqualify him in front of a large audience would be extremely detrimental to the growth of the sport. I challenge anyone to watch that video and say that his disqualification helps the growth of the sport.

In order to DQ someone for a samba, the samba must be so obvious that even a dumbass spectator can understand that the guy is in trouble.

THAT is the purpose of the new rules, to make DQ's clear to the public. Whether or not they achieve that is still under question, but it is important to understand why they came into existence.

If they do not achieve their purpose (which will take time to tell), then a new democratic process should begin. Having 'rogue' nations go it alone is not the solution.

Your post is very interesting ; but I can give you the example of an extremely popular sport where the dumbbass spectator understands nothing if he does not practice himself...

Judo is extremely popular but if you attend judo competitions, you are unable to tell who is the winner of the fight in most cases...

But I think the problem is not the spectator but the competitor himself...

In judo, the rules are quite complex but are easy to understand and accepted by the competitors...

At Massy's event, there were many good freedivers who attended an AIDA comp for the first time... some of them have been eliminated without understanding why... it can give them a feeling of injustice...

Not being disqualified is becoming a discipline in itself which advantages the "old rabbits" knowing the ropes and having their personal coach flustering them what they should say and do...

In addition, there are in France freediving comps organized by the CMAS affiliated FFESSM... and as far as I know, there are not such tricky rules...

The more complex the procedure the larger part given to the subjectivity of the judges...

 

[Panos Lianos]

AIDA Hellas (Greece) was one of the nations that voted against removing the LMC (samba) rule during the AIDA Assembly votation. But the majority of the votes were in favor of removing the rule and establishing a surfacing protocol. So the technical committee started working towards a surfacing protocol that would make everyone’s life easier (judges, athletes, spectators).

I am a member of this committee. Making a protocol too easy would allow all “hard” LMC’s to be valid, for example that all you had to do would be to keep airways above surface (then you could shake all you want and for as long as you want). Making a protocol too strict would disqualify many athletes that are really OK, for example surface and remove mask and give ok within 5 seconds. Remember that a very strict protocol could even produce LMC (for example athletes taking too little time to recover before starting a task). So we had to come up with a protocol that would only allow those LMC’s that the general public doesn’t see in the first place, since the main problem was: athletes getting disq and the audience saying “why?????”. So we came up with a protocol that is easy to follow if you are ok, even if you have one of those small LMC’s, like a twitch of a finger for example. You have 20 seconds to a) remove “face equipment” (mask, goggles, nose clip), b) give an “OK” sign and c) say “I’m ok”. All must be done in this order, while keeping airways above surface.

I have personally tried this and it is no trouble at all when you are ok. Just incorporate it into your training and it will be as easy as the previous situation with the old rules. I think it is unfair to judge the new system so soon. Let’s give it some time. Athletes will learn the new rules as they train and we will see how it goes. We never claimed that we have the perfect set of rules (if such a thing even exists). Every change creates some friction. Besides, if the whole thing is so bad, I’m sure the AIDA Assembly will vote in favor of a change.

 

[Jason Billows]

Eric,

Good points, but for the sake of argument I'd like to keep the conversation going...

I don't think that the new rules were created to "allow" sambas, but I do think that the new rules will result in more people having sambas and more severe sambas.

I agree with Claude's observation and think it should certainly have been addressed, but I don't think the new rules were the best option. I think that judges should be working on a basis of giving the benefit of the doubt to atheletes when it is not a cut and dry situation. Would that have resulted in some atheletes getting away with mild sambas? Sure, but not the scary kind of sambas that are going to freak the public out.

I have heard the argument that the new rules make it cut and dry and eliminate uncertainty, but I disagree. For example, as a judge, how am I to deal with the fact that a Japanese competitor who doesn't speak English says "I am OK" but not clearly. Was it due to a samba or accent?

As for dealing with the rules and not creating "bylaws" for national associations, I think it is fine as long as they are being made more strict and not lenient. They would still have to play by the the AIDA rules at AIDA competitions. Bylaws are used in many ways for government, associations and other organizations. They simply reflect the more individualized opinions of smaller groups within the whole.

I realize that thought and effort went into creating the new rules, but I'm not optimistic about their success. Hopefully I'll be proved wrong.

 

[cebaztian]

Videoexamples for you with QUICKTIME.

http://www.fridykning.org/mov/jens.mov

6.10 DQ BO

http://www.fridykning.org/mov/sp.mov

One athlete 6.29 OK
(someone suggested DQ this athlete for too fast OKsign)

Second athlete 100 meter OK
He swallowed some water at start therefore he coughs afterwards.
He makes OK sign andf looks at his coach since the coach asks him if he is OK.
The flotations where put there by initiative of the safetydiver.

In AIDASWEDEN we are discussing national corrections to the SP rule.
Or at least some clarifications.

Sebastian
Sweden

 

[francois]

Your post is very interesting ; but I can give you the example of an extremely popular sport where the dumbbass spectator understands nothing if he does not practice himself...

Judo is extremely popular but if you attend judo competitions, you are unable to tell who is the winner of the fight in most cases...

But I think the problem is not the spectator but the competitor himself...

In judo, the rules are quite complex but are easy to understand and accepted by the competitors...

At Massy's event, there were many good freedivers who attended an AIDA comp for the first time... some of them have been eliminated without understanding why... it can give them a feeling of injustice...

Not being disqualified is becoming a discipline in itself which advantages the "old rabbits" knowing the ropes and having their personal coach flustering them what they should say and do...

In addition, there are in France freediving comps organized by the CMAS affiliated FFESSM... and as far as I know, there are not such tricky rules...

The more complex the procedure the larger part given to the subjectivity of the judges...

I am sorry to say it again, but i am just fed up of athletes complaining about being disqualified. Most of the athletes i saw being disqualified in Nice simply didn't know the rules. They didn't read them and weren't present at the events comitee.

Most of them were clear, but totally unable to make the protocol correctly, just because they didn't know it...

This is not new among the french(who were the mainly concerned)...they just don't give a F.... to the rules. Mifsud is the perfect example. Months of training, of effort....but incapable of making an "ok" sign.



Now, to answer Eric Fattah, it is true that the idea of having a little samba accepted as far as the "public" doesn't notice could be an acceptable idea, but it is not what this new protocol is about.

We ve seen big big sambas accepted. And believe me...some people witnessing these attempts were choqued about it, and i doubt they could understand why a guy making twice the distance, surfacing smilling could be disqualified for doing the wrong protocol. Rules are to be followed, but .....from now on, we ll have :

Huge samba - white card !!!

About the coach and to join subaquaticus (if i remember well), if we want to judge the level of consciousness of the surfacing athletes, then we should not aloud the coach to say anything, and specially not "take off your mask....ok sign....say ok" The athlete should do it by himself with being reminded. Otherwise it looses its sense.


Finally, the athlete can indeed choose not to be tapped and to have his own coach making his safety. In the case the judge notices anything wrong and the coach doesn't react, he orders the official safety freediver to take care of the situation.




:ko
O
O
O
o
o
o
o
°
°
°Francois Gautier - CIPA - NICE
bzugo80@yahoo.fr
00 33 6 60 20 92 15