Goal Oriented Diving

[Mark Vlahos]

I have heard many times that goal oriented diving is a bad thing. Generally I agree with that statement, however goals are inherent to almost all human endeavors, and diving is certainly one of them.

A goal of simply making a distant geographical point on a cave dive is probably a bad idea, especially if you do so by eschewing safe practices. Encroaching on gas reserves, damaging the cave by using poor technique, or using tools like stage bottles or scooters without training and experience, are all widely accepted as poor choices.

We should however consider that a goal can be a useful tool to aid a diver as he or she gains the requisite experience. For example, if a relatively new cave diver is unable to complete the Bone Room circuit at Ginnie Springs. The diver could concentrate on improving their position in the cave against the flow. Learning to stay high through the Gallery, and choosing where to cross to the other side come with experience. Learning how fast is the right speed for them to pull through the lips, and efficiently putting in a jump so you and your teammates can move quickly through the cave. If a diver also concentrates on improving trim, and pays attention to proper kicking techniques that diver will find that he or she is getting progressively farther into the cave on each dive.

Goals can be useful tools when the net effect is that a diver learns how to be a more highly skilled and proficient diver. Divers gain the experience that comes with having attempted but failed to make the goal safely. Slowly adding the pieces together with each attempt. Turning a dive 100 feet before a geographic goal is still a good dive, the cave will still be there tomorrow. Eventually their skills will improve to the point where they are able to reach their goal.

Goals at the expense of safe diving practices are a very bad idea.

Goals as a tool to focus on improvement can be extremely useful.

Mark Vlahos

[floridakid]

Damn, what a well thought post, kudos

[Kelly Jessop]

. For example, if a relatively new cave diver is unable to complete the Bone Room circuit at Ginnie Springs. The diver could concentrate on improving their position in the cave against the flow. Learning to stay high through the Gallery, and choosing where to cross to the other side come with experience. Learning how fast is the right speed for them to pull through the lips, and efficiently putting in a jump so you and your teammates can move quickly through the cave. If a diver also concentrates on improving trim, and pays attention to proper kicking techniques that diver will find that he or she is getting progressively farther into the cave on each dive.

This is the antithesis of what most people mean when they are talking about goal oriented diving. Your comments are correct in that with time and experience,the goal will come to you without having to force the issue. The goal oriented diving that people give a negative context is, for example, the Ginnie diver who has swam only to 1000',get a scooter,and the first dive there is to the Heinkel. Now we have 2000' of cave never seen before,and no real testing of gas requirments in case of scooter failure. Or,the just certified full cave diver who wants to do the Grand Traverse without testing either side of the traverse. If we reset our goals to good trim and bouyancy,progressive penetration,learning to read the cave,good technique,or basically reinforcing fundamental,then the benefits of seeing new things happen automatically.

[Squirrel Girl]

This is the antithesis of what most people mean when they are talking about goal oriented diving.

It's not the antithesis of what I think of as goal-oriented diving. I pretty much always have goals. Maybe it's go-in-the-main-tunnel-until-I-hit-thirds, but oftentimes it's a loop. I might bail on the loop goal because I hit thirds or have another issue. But I still have a goal.

If you've swum Ginnie and understand your gas consumption out with the current, it might be fairly uncomplicated to calculate your gas supply in case of emergency and do a scooter dive somewhat farther than you've swum. For instance, if you've swum 1500 feet in an outgoing current, calculated your gas, and then come back and scooter the same route but go 2000 feet and have 2X the gas at your turn around (but only 1.33 % farther in), I don't think you're wildly unsafe.

All this isn't to disagree that there are people who push the envelope too much for their experience (or for the conditions). There are people who do crazy things and let ego drive them to unsafe actions. Or become distracted, etc., etc., etc.

But I find "goal-oriented" as a too wide of a brush. Goals aren't bad. Disregarding the cost of certain goals is.

[Kelly Jessop]

It's not the antithesis of what I think of as goal-oriented diving. I pretty much always have goals. Maybe it's go-in-the-main-tunnel-until-I-hit-thirds, but oftentimes it's a loop. I might bail on the loop goal because I hit thirds or have another issue. But I still have a goal.

If you've swum Ginnie and understand your gas consumption out with the current, it might be fairly uncomplicated to calculate your gas supply in case of emergency and do a scooter dive somewhat farther than you've swum. For instance, if you've swum 1500 feet in an outgoing current, calculated your gas, and then come back and scooter the same route but go 2000 feet and have 2X the gas at your turn around (but only 1.33 % farther in), I don't think you're wildly unsafe.

All this isn't to disagree that there are people who push the envelope too much for their experience (or for the conditions). There are people who do crazy things and let ego drive them to unsafe actions. Or become distracted, etc., etc., etc.

But I find "goal-oriented" as a too wide of a brush. Goals aren't bad. Disregarding the cost of certain goals is.

I am not denying all dives have a plan/goal,but the negative connotation in this context of goal oriented diving,is people who have to see ie the pressure guage,the heinkel,the well casing,the grand traverse etc. Dives which deserve a progressive nature are skipped inorder to see these goals. I guess an analogy is someone who has the desire to do Huautla,even though they have only done simple vertical and sumps.

I don't think you're wildly unsafe.

No,not wildly,but not very conservative.

[Squirrel Girl]

I am not denying all dives have a plan/goal,but the negative connotation in this context of goal oriented diving,is people who have to see ie the pressure guage,the heinkel,the well casing,the grand traverse etc. Dives which deserve a progressive nature are skipped inorder to see these goals. I guess an analogy is someone who has the desire to do Huautla,even though they have only done simple vertical and sumps.

Who would do something so crazy? Totally insane! Unless, of course, maybe they'd trained and trained and trained over the course of a year for that one 1400' dive.

[mfascuba]

I don't see the problem with goals - as long as they are pursued in a cautious, progressive manner. I've done goal oriented solo dives where I've turned 100 ft or 300 ft or 1000 ft shy of the goal because something didn't feel right. The cave will be there another day - you get to choose if you will be there to enjoy it. Like the Dos Equis commercial, "choose wisely, my friends"....

Mark

[Sludge]

Who would do something so crazy? Totally insane! Unless, of course, maybe they'd trained and trained and trained over the course of a year for that one 1400' dive.

[RN]

It's a matter of semantics, but I like to refer to the bad as goal-oriented diving and the good as having an objective for a dive or a series of dives. The phrase goal-oriented seems to connote a need to accomplish it fairly quickly. An objective seems to indicate something that will occur over time.

[Squirrel Girl]

It's a matter of semantics, but I like to refer to the bad as goal-oriented diving and the good as having an objective for a dive or a series of dives. The phrase goal-oriented seems to connote a need to accomplish it fairly quickly. An objective seems to indicate something that will occur over time.

I missed this post when I just posted my response to Kelly. It certainly does seem to be a matter of semantics! In general I like the concept you put forth, but even still. I may have a goal/objective for a particular dive (get around XYZ loop). If I fail to make it this time (maybe I've done it before), I might not care if I do it again. It's merely attached to this particular dive. If it's a "big" deal, a difficult (maybe to me, maybe to anyone) goal/objective, it might take repeated attempts to achieve the goal/objective. It might be important enough that I keep plugging away at it until I accomplish said goal/objective.

I would say what it all really boils down to, is how you calculate/disregard the risk associated with what you're attempting to achieve.