Reply to Thands
Hey Tom, I was out of town as well. I share your concern about multiple "governments" occuring from how each person wants to define the sport to fit their personal interests. I don't want the French, Italian, Pippin, Mayol, Streeter, Olympic, or anyone else telling us what is or isn't a sport, a freedive, world record. I am looking for consensus within the population of the people involved in the sport and not just the "elite." Your comments comparing the similarities of freediving to climbing touches on the essential point that I am trying to make but your are not accurate in much of what you say about climbing. The role of the climbing community in developing their sport is great model for us though. I was an avid climber for over 20 years. Until the 1950's when several people within the sport started to set the ranking standards by climbing in close competition with each other climbing did not progress very rapidly. In fact a climber from 1850 would have easily stepped into climbing in 1940. During that 100 year period prior to the 1950s most of small changes in climbing were developed by the military for combat purposes. Then in the 1950s and 60s in Yosemite, where people were observing each others efforts as they happenned and then trying to best them in informal serial competitions, the sport took on its modern form. The transformation took less than 20 years to go from a regional practice to standards accepted around the world. The ranking systems, in this country what is used is called the Yosemite Decimal System, were developed by people in the sport and refined over the years. Its usefulness was achieved by a consensus within the climbing community and there has been no devisiveness as has occurred in freediving for past 40 years. A climber who posts the first ascent can rank the climb but that ranking only becomes accepted when it is climbed by others who accept or reject the rankings. The final accepted rankings are the result of consensus and rankings can change if the climb itself changes. There has been no multiplicity of ruling bodies on this and there has been an international attempt to learn how different ranking systems compare and respect the different ranking formats. Much of climbing, especially rock climbing, has an informal serial competitive component in which one person or team attempts a route while other watch. Those watching then attempt the same route with the goal to get higher. Very little of todays climbing involves people going off alone and then claiming world records. The reason places like Yosemite and Smith Rocks produce the worlds hardest climbs is because they allow for this head to head competition to occur. No one gets credit for the worlds hardest climb without consensus from the climbing community. There is almost global acceptance of the standards of climbing that include what constitutes a first ascent. The first ascent of Cerro Torres was not recognized by the climbing community as a valid first ascent because the climbers used a gas driven drill to place bolts which violated the consensus about the use motors to ascent. Yes, when someone does a first ascent they get credit for that ascent as long as they do it within the the manner and style that constitutes a valid first ascent which includes the method of the ascent. No one gets credit for a first ascent if they fly a helocopter to the summit. The first ascent of the nose of El Cap in Yosemite was done mostly with aid on pitons and bolts. Later, the first clean aid ascent was done using nuts, chocks, and friends. Recently, the first "free ascent" was accomplished which no aid was used. The last is viewed by the climbing community as the highest standard. But the biggest boom in climbing developed in the last 20 years with head to head competition on climbing walls. You point about climbing accepting first ascents as valid if the person died on the descent does underscores the value of community consensus. Just because the climbing community accepts ascents when the climber does not survive the descent does not require the freediving community to do the same thing. Or we may want too. Why not have class of "descent' records in which the diver enters a submersible stationed at the end of the dive. I am against but if we are going to accept the absolute depth under any condition as the only standard then why bother with the ascent, especially if we don't care if the person is conscious or even alive by after they achieved the world record depth. Which ever way we go I want us to decide this via consensus; not Pippin, Streeter, Mayol, and the various and sundry governments. In climbing much of the consensus resulted from having two very good climbing magazines, Climbing in the USA, and Mountain from GB (I apologize if I have left out other climbing magazines that were not in English - it is my failure to have learned another language and should in no way be construed as implying that non-English magazines were inferior or had a lessor impact) that allowed for the discussions to occur. Part my motivation in posting this thread in this format was start a similar process in freediving in todays format. Maybe a hard print magazine would help. What made it work in climbing was the attitude of the "elite" climbers to share their ideas but to accept the ideas from anyone in the community and to accept the consensus of the climbing community. People like Royal Robbins, Yvon Chounard, and later Henry Barber, Ron Kauk, and Lynn Hill, to name a few of the superstars of sport, all worked within the consensual ethics and standards of practice. I am not ever going to be one the "elite" in this sport but I want to be part of the consensus process. It is wonderful when an average freediver like myself can participate in a discussion like this with someone like Erik who has the potential to be one of the great freedivers. Finally, I don't agree that Pippin is promoting freediving. Pippin is promoting Pippin. And I am not interested in lessons in narcissism. Hopefully, Streeter or one of new superstars will start to take an active role in building consensus to promote the sport and not simply to modifying the sport to promote themselves. Your comment that the person who promotes themselves the best is often the person who wins confuses me. Wins what? Tiger Woods spent 15 years learning to play golf then started winning on the world stage which led to his earning money by promoting himself but he won by beating the best in head to head competition. Thanks for your continued input and thoughtful comments Tom. Again, I hope your willingness to challenge my ideas will encourage others to participate in this process because without that we will never develop consensus.
PS. Tom go to the freedive equipment forum under scleral contact lens. Erik turned me onto to the fluid goggles. I thought I had ordered some but have never heard back. I'll post what else I find out. Warmly, Angus