• 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!

The situation in Italy

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.
Why CMAS

I have a doubt in my head.
CMAS is the governing body of many sports: UW rugby, UW Hockey, FinSwimming, UW orientation, Spearfishing and Freediving?, not sure from the last.
But other sports like swimming, skating, football, etc has it own governing body, there is no World Inland Federation or Confederation.
So why we can't create an Apnea World Confederation?
I think freediving has enough athletes to define our own destiny.
What do we need to do that?.
 
Well, that's sort of what AIDA has been doing since 1994...ain't it?

In my best opinion, the ammount of freedivers today is a consequence of AIDA's work (with its beginner's errors, IAFD, FREE, and all of that), despite CMAS' attempts to ignore the sport into oblivion for whatever reason. That, and this little film production by a crazy Frenchman, of course...

Chris Engelbrecht, Copenhagen
 
I would say the amount freedivers today is 99% due to spearfishing and snorkelling (those snorkellers that eventually go much deeper than the stereotype "snorkeller"). Unless they are not categorized as freedivers, which I would not understand.
 
On a past thread the differentiation between freediver and snorkeller was the use of a weight belt. The more I think about the intent of putting on a weight belt the more this seems an appropriate way to differentiate the two activities.

Andy
 
Dear CMAS,
There has been a lot of discussion on this thread about the conclusions the CMAS has made, such as in the case of no cb, but as Adrian said the merits of these type of things are debatable and even if there is no agreement, each can see the other’s point. I would even venture to say that there isn’t one member of Deeper Blue who has posted on this thread that doesn’t find at least one thing in the CMAS rules, etc. that they like and agree with.

A good friend of mine in Europe has joined the CMAS and is competing in your competitions. I am happy the people of the CMAS have gone to the work of organizing competitions in his area, because without them, he would have no where to compete locally.

Mr. Gianfranco Ciavarella, the question that Adrian asked you to join the forum and respond to is, why do you want to keep athletes from competing in more than one organization’s meets and how is that good for the sport of freediving? If the CMAS wants to do jb instead of cb at their meets, for whatever reasons, then what is wrong for a member of CMAS (licensed holder) to compete in another organizations meet that offers cb. I hope your answer is not “that we have already been told the answers and we just didn’t like them”, because this sounds like someone who is afraid to admit their true reasons, because they are afraid they will look foolish in trying to defend them.

I myself would be happy to support the CMAS, if it was not for this “exclusion rule” issue.
don
 
Last edited:
I would not say that is a fair way to draw the difference, since no suit diving does not lend to diving with weight. In cyprus the water was 31 degrees so I stopped wearing my thin suit. With no-fins I was diving to 26m and none of the spearfishermen there would have contested I was freediving. ;)

I think to distinguish between a freediver and a snorkeller would be fair to do solely based on the dive time. If you have a regular tendency to stay down for longer than a minute, then it is almost guaranteed that you are beyond surface snorkelling and 30 sec dips.

However, I mentioned snorkellers, to refer to those who became freedivers due to a heightened pursuit of snorkelling. ex. myself.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion, the difference between a freediver and a snorkeler is that the freediver equalizes his ears, and the snorkeler either doesn't equalize, doesn't know how to equalize, or cannot dive deep enough to need to equalize.

I was a snorkeler for years. The day I learned to equalize I became a freediver.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada
 
  • Like
Reactions: OceanSwimmer
Tyler,

I'm not sure if any time limit including 1 minute is a way to differentiate either as it opens up a can of worms (the 59secs or 1:01 discussion or what one minute means to one person vs the next etc) Maybe a less subjective descripton of the activities would be:

1. Surface Snorkelling (no breath hold)
2. Freediving (breath hold)

This may offend some of our sensitivites about our own abilities and the right to call ourselves Freedivers as it would broaden the group somewhat but it would be a simple approach....and I like simple :D

The point I clumsily made in the post above was around "intent". As soon as someone puts a weight belt on it is with the intent of leaving the surface and therefore it would be valid to call them a freediver. The opposite wasn't intended (ie if you don't put a weight belt on you can't be a freediver - Murat's exhale dives probably are a little beyond the snorkelling definition:duh )

What do you think?

Andy
 
;) Yes I was thinking intent is really what it is all about, but got stuck on the dogma of trying to define an action/state. I interpretted the weight belt as a fixed state as opposed to intent.

Even though I have never seen a snorkeller do a 1 min breathhold, as they do not expect it within their ability and do not intend to attempt pushing it. Which is why I said if you REGULARLY are doing 1min dives, then there is no chance you are a snorkeller and anybody who freedives (at least almost), definately performs 1min breathholds while diving quite often.

So at the end of the day my vote is for, ask the person if they are a freediver. And if they do not know, then ask if they intend to regularly dive on a single breath.

As far as equalizing, I know kids who dive to the bottom of wave pools to reach the bottom, and have to equalize. Well maybe your onto something, they are training!
 
Tyler,

You seem to post regularly after midnight(your time)!! Are you on some sleep deprivation training schedule at the moment? :confused:

I guess that even though we see a progession in skills etc from snorkelling to freediving it is easy to forget that freediving came first. Some bright spark holding their breath on the surface stuck a hollow reed in their mouth and solved a problem!

On the pool thing, by my definition, anyone making a nuisance of themselves and bombing their mates, doing a tumble turn or platform diving would be a freediver......so maybe I'm not on to something!!

A little off topic, but are you using a finger sensor or earlobe sensor with the Ohmeda unit as mine stops working as soon as I start getting into real contractions with the finger sensor! Must be something to do with the limited peripheral blood flow at that time. A strong signal gets progessively weaker and then fails completely.

Andy
 
Translation of Gianfranco's post.

Miracle !
Here I am, your enemy, the stupid tyrant capale of all types of tyrrany.
I am sure that nothing will be able to change your views.
How could they change, are you or are you not freediving?
The rest doesn't exist !
AIDA exists ? CB exists? Can you organise CB competitions?
So what's changed ?
NOTHING !
Continue to ignore us and follow the dream of freediving for the rich kids of the west seeking emotions in the blue.
******, hiphip hurrah for the democracy of the current stupid american.
The USA is a large great democratic country, pity that there are also american idiots.
He who wrote in this discussion is Linndye England by any chance ?
Does he want to teach democracy by leading men tied at the waist?
Joefox wrote from the begining that the decision taken by CMAS is because the IOC invited the International Federations to proceed in that manner.
The insurance for the athletes is not guaranteed in competitions that are not recognised.
The veto is to safeguard the athletes, and if someone pays the the consequences because he cannot participate in his surfer friends competitions, SO WHAT.
You continue to say that Joefox doesn't answer you, but the truth is that it's you who do not see that which you don't like...
Where were the SIRS of democracy when Chapuis gave the order, "URBI ET ORBI" (to everyone indistinctly) to boicott?
Were you sleeping?
Well, continue to sleep.
Farewell !
Gianfranco Ciavarella
 
Originally posted by ADR
Tyler,

You seem to post regularly after midnight(your time)!! Are you on some sleep deprivation training schedule at the moment? :confused:

A little off topic, but are you using a finger sensor or earlobe sensor with the Ohmeda unit as mine stops working as soon as I start getting into real contractions with the finger sensor!

Andy

;) Well more often than not, I am up to the wee hours, communicating with people in Cyprus or just plain fixated on something. However, I think the time was messed up for the last few posts, but now it seems to be reading correctly at 9:42pm for the previous post. :confused: At this time I am trying to maintain an early to bed schedule.

I am using the finger sensor for the oximeter. I notice that when I get serious contractions, 7:00+, that the pulse rate becomes inaccurate, but it seems the SaO2 % remains stable. If under non-apnea I shake my body or arm, or simulate contractions, I get the same result.
 
Hiera thanks for the translation.

So the things of value that I can pull out of Gianfranco's comments are:

1. That it was the IOC that pushed for this approach from CMAS.
2. that the reason to regulate international competitors was to prevent them from putting themselves in harms way (so they would not have complications in team adjustments?).
3. the athelete can not benefit from insurance at other competitions.

I am glad for these steps towards clarity. Thanks!

This leads to more questions, however.

To point #2, it seems contradictory to allow competitors to take part in non-international CB, but somehow international CB is different, if #2 is an accurate reason? As well it seems short-sighted that they would think to regulate participation in international CB to prevent harm, instead of just regulating all participation in needlessly risky activities non-international, international, non-competitive, and competitive? If it is based on reporting infractions, then it would not be difficult to regulate all potentially harmful activities and have other report you breaching this faith. Thoughts?

To point #3, I am not sure if I understand the idea of insurance being referred to, but if it is insurance where there is a problem and the athelete will benefit with some recovery expenses or something, then it would seem very unlikely that the insurance aids much at all to ensure that the athelete is not a liability to a team. If they die or succumb to injury in another competition, insurance or not, the team will be affected.

So personally, it still looks pretty unclear and messy as far as reasoning goes, but maybe there will be more pieces presented bit by bit.
 
Sorry I wasn't around to translate Gianfranco Ciavarella's post, although quite frankly I don't know if it would have been worth my while. I am in Sharm el Sheikh (Red Sea, Egypt) now, where the internet points are scarce (even in a 5 star resort!). This is without a doubt the most convenient place for freediving training in the world, with 60m+ literally at your doorstep, 45m visibility and warm, calm water everyday. Bevan is here for another 5 months, so Herbert and Martin better stake their flags on the 100m mountain molto presto...
At the moment there are over 200 italian apneists here for a kind of freediving festival. I have talked with many of them and have still yet to meet one who is interested in 'Just Blackouts,' or who is on good terms with Sig. Ciavarella.
We had a CW competition yesterday which was a great success. There was only one samba out of 50 dives, and no blackouts. The limit was 65 meters, and only Bevan managed this depth. I have had polemics with my sinuses and therefore inscribed 55m, but this still proved difficult as I had to force compensate with Valsalva (normally no-hands) and my mask filled during the ascent (forgot to remove snorkel), meaning I did the last half blind. It was also my first dive with fins this year and I changed at the last minute from mono to bi (both borrowed as I only train no-fins).
Didn't mean to change the topic, but just wanted to show how the Italians haven't yet given up on freediving - in fact they're as keen as ever!
 
160 meters for Monica Barbero today.

Dynamic is the only discipline in common for CMAS and AIDA.

Joefox
 
As far as I know, they've never "recognized" static. For sure, they didn't introduce it as a competitive discipline, mainly because -from the media point of view- it's boring to death. Anyway, they consider it good exercise and... safe.

Monica did 160 meters in a FIPSAS competition in Trieste (a selection for the Italian Championship) in a 32 meters pool.

Joefox
 
As reluctant as I am to find myself in the middle of this rather awkward argument, I think the whole subject is important enough to offer some words of explanation for Ciavarella's post.

Firstly it's important to point out that he is both extremely passionate and serious about the subject but also an ironic and irreverent personality. The results are often quite spectacularly awful, as in this case.

Secondly, as far as I can tell, there is some history of strong disagreement between the authoritarian world of organized international sport (CMAS) and the free-spirited freedivers that make up AIDA. The apparently unprovoked outburst makes more sense when put in this context.

I will now TRY to interpret the essence of what CMAS is trying to say. I don't necessarily agree with all of their rules, but I do at least empathise with the reasoning. I've paraphrased and simplified and embellished what Ciavarella has said during the exchange of several mails, so it may not be perfectly accurate.

Tylerz was right when he said that many of the CMAS decisions are simply the implementation of IOC regulations. In many ways, CMAS is bound to behave in this way. I think I explained in a previous post that this had 4 main motivations :

1. In the interest of developing apnea as a sport (hopefully an olympic one), the IOC describes a strict set of rules that must be absolutley standardized from country to country. I think there are 140 countries with organizations affiliated to CMAS and if the framework of rules was too loose, there would be absolute chaos. I suppose that it's the same problem that AIDA has resolved by having a central pool of judges that are dispatched (and often overruled) by a central Wizard of Oz.

2. As part of the 'sportification' of freediving, CMAS has decided to standardize on JB and dynamic for their merits as spectator sports. The idea is that only a finite number of people are ever going to get excitied about someone lying motionless in a pool for 6 or 7 minutes, but hopefully the chosen disciplines have a chance of gaining momentum.

3. The general feeling amongst the CMAS guys is that CB is beautiful but too dangerous. I guess that experienced mid-level divers (like most of us) are less at risk. The danger lies with the newbies 'getting out of their depth' (bad for the development of the sport) and the elite guys whose extreme depths create increased risk.

CMAS not only chooses to stop their own CB competitions, but to 'protect' their athletes "even from themselves" (as Ciavarella puts it). In my opinion this is partially an attempt to 'build a team' but mainly a legal legacy from past litagation brought against the IOC.

4. Finally, if an athlete wants to officially represent his country in an International competition then he is bound by an agreement between his government and the IOC that requires the organization to be made by CMAS. You can't say that you played for England at soccer, just because you took part in an international event - it has to be FIFA to organize it.


Ciavarella says that he understands that not everyone will agree with this position (especially with respect to the CB decision) and that they would never try to stop other organizations from setting up CB comps. He is also aware that this will result in some of the most passionate and skillful freedivers shunning CMAS. As much as it would be nice to have a unified organization for both sporting and recreational purposes, he feels that it is unlikely to happen.

The CMAS position on AIDA is a completely neutral one. The two organizations can happily coexist - there just cannot be any mix-and-match from the athletes.

On the question of tolerating CB at a National level, this is recognized as inconsistent, and is unlikely to continue indefinitely.


CMAS also apparently understands the sacrifice that its athletes will have to make. One of the great things about freediving is the chance we all have to meet and compete with the greatest divers on earth. Most of us who have been to an AIDA event have dived alongside Nitzsch, Misfud, Fattah, Stapanek, Carrera, Topi, etc and it would be a tragedy to 'lose' such important points of reference. Although the CB/JB argument may never come to an end, Ciavarella is sure that within 3 or 4 years there will be a dynamic championship that will bring AIDA and CMAS athletes together in competition.


In my opinion, the easiest way to understand the driving force behind the CMAS message is to remember that there is a big difference between an official sport and a recreational activity - even one whose proponents are the very best in the world.

Ciao

Al
 
despite CMAS' attempts to ignore the sport into oblivion for whatever reason

I asked our friend Ciavarella about this the other day. Apparently there is a rule that prevents more than 1 organization being affiliated to CMAS per country. This is fine for those countries (like Italy or France) in which the affiliated organization actively supports all the sports under the submersed-water-sport umbrella, but it has terrible consequences for countries (like America, Australia, etc) in which the organization doesn't promote Apnea.

He said that this rule had already been changed to allow a second Apnea-only organization to be set up in these countries in order to ensure that freediving is correctly represented and supported.

Ciao

Al

P.S. 160m is truly amazing - congratulations Monica.
 
DeeperBlue.com - The Worlds Largest Community Dedicated To Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing

ABOUT US

ISSN 1469-865X | Copyright © 1996 - 2024 deeperblue.net limited.

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

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

ADVERT