Serious question on ignored advice.

[Ron 7]

Quote

I'm not out to get you, simply because I have other things to do that are infinitely more interesting.

You could fool me since you always have "issues" with my posts....

But its not like your opinion of me matters...I just find it funny that you always have something to say about me...And most times its negative

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Nightingale 0]

I've said positive things about your posts when warranted.

[yoink 321]

children! Play nice

back to topic:

the sad fact is that there will always be people out there who are either:

1) to stupid to understand advice and need to have hard and fast rules or they'll just ignore help through lack of comprehension.

2) arrogant enough to believe 'new' rules really do apply to them... "I know no-one with 40 jumps has a VX79 before... but I'm different!"

3) seek advice until they hear what they want and then convince them selves that it was the only advice they'd got.

People can justify why they were a special case to ignore advice until the cows come home... I know - I've done it - but it certainly took me a while to realise that there are no exceptions to playing the odds...

my 2 pence

[skynole 0]

Quote

I've been doing a lot of thinking lately

I've warned you about that...but there you go again not listening to advice. (Couldn't resist, you left yourself open!)

Back to topic...

Skydivers in general, like some have already mentioned, have certain degree of ego. This leads to selective hearing in some cases and more importantly IMHO, that it's all in the presentation of the advice. I've seen some instructors/upjumpers have an asshole, drill sergeant, talking down to, etc. attitude when giving advice. Even though the info they are passing along is good, it never really sinks in because of the way they pass it along.

I experienced this when I was first getting started by some, and all I got out of the conversation was thinking about what an asshole this person was. I really keep this in mind whenver I'm in the position of giving advice and always try my best to be patient in the conversation and ALWAYS talk "eye-to-eye".

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

3) The answer they got was not defended. "I have 3000 jumps over 10 years" is not proof that an answer is good. Anyone answering with that as the primary justification should be prepared to be ignored. This is a life risking sport - a jumper isn't going to just accept a reply that doesn't feel right.

It could have something to do with a guy with 10 years and 3,000 jumps knows more than a guy with 9 jumps...That guy may give plenty of reasons. But the guy with 9 jumps might not want to listen due to ego.

It appears you think this is about you, but let's deal with that later.

Let's define "up and coming" as < 100 jumps. Certainly this person knows less on the sport than virtually any 10 year veteren with 3000 jumps. However, it doesn't mean that the veteren is right about everything. If he can't support his answer, the newbie would be a fool to rely on it. He's the one who pays the price if the information is bullshit. How many times have people been chastised for relying on a more experienced person for a bad spot? That's not ego, that's self survival. Ego is believing the concepts are too difficult for a low timer to comprehend.

So if the motivation is to save lives, giving undefended (or rude) advice is counterproductive. It's then more about hearing yourself speak. Sure there are many who don't want to hear; you can't do anything about those folks other than try.

As for you, Ron, you give an explanation. But you seem to get frustrated when it is challenged or asked for elaboration, and then you throw out the veteren label to end the discussion. I have no issues with your bluntness, but this I do. You of course have no obligations, but it makes me question which motivations you're following. And I'll ask others instead for more information.

I'll end by pointing out I listed this scenario as #3, behind answer shopping and conflicting advice.

[Ron 7]

Quote

Let's define "up and coming" as < 100 jumps. Certainly this person knows less on the sport than virtually any 10 year veteren with 3000 jumps. However, it doesn't mean that the veteren is right about everything

No, but given that the sub-100 jumper does not know as much. How is he to know what advice is good and what is bad?

Many 100 jump jumpers are just shopping for the answer they want. When they don't get the answer they want they almost always come back with one of two answers:

1. You don't know me or my skills.

2. I have others telling me its OK. (Again they are just shopping)

To refute #1. People don't need to know everyone to make observations on how they MOST likely will react. If I take a whuffo up in a plane and give him a rig and no instruction I can 99% of the time predict what he is going to do. Same thing goes for ALL aspects of this sport, or almost anything else. While not being 100% correct, it does work well.

#2. The guys that are shopping might very well be listening to the guy with 500 jumps that is telling him the answer they want.

Quote

he can't support his answer, the newbie would be a fool to rely on it.

Really? Pull before impact. I don't need to back that up. Don't turn low, Crash with your wings level, Don't run a PPO of higher than 1.6 while active, Breathe out while you accend. While I can back up each statment...If I don't that does not make them less true.

Quote

Ego is believing the concepts are too difficult for a low timer to comprehend.

I would say ego is thinking you know more than the guy with many times more experience than you....Thinking that you are special and don't fit into the standard progression.

Ego is not listening to the advice unless its what you are looking for.

Quote

As for you, Ron, you give an explanation. But you seem to get frustrated when it is challenged or asked for elaboration, and then you throw out the veteren label to end the discussion.

Not for an EXPLANATION or ELABORATION...But when some guy with 100 jumps tells me he is "special" I mention that I have seen a hundred "special" jumpers...Some of them died. They don't like that and always say I don't know what I am talking about since I don't know them..Again they are "special". At that point, yep I bring up my time in sport and experiences.

You are a tech diver right? Well if I was planning a deep wreck dive that was clearly above my expereince level, and you told me it was above my level...I'd listen. I would not sit there and argue with you about it... How the hell do I think I know more than you if you are so much more expereienced?

THATS ego....

Quote

but it makes me question which motivations you're following

My motivation.....Some people will listen if you talk nice...Ask Vanilla about me..She asks questions, and I give her answers...She asks me to eloborate, and I do...

Then you have the guys that ask a question wanting a certain answer...When I don't give it to them they tell me I don't know them, and I don't know what I am talking about ...Oh shit here we go again.

Thats when I tell them I have much more expereince than them...And of course they then say that jump numbers don't mean anything...

You will also notice that its the <300 jump crowd that always seem to argue with me...And yes I do argue back...

Why? Well, they may not listen...But I did all I could.

I refect the attitude of the guy asking the question...If he starts the Bull shit line of jump #'s don't mean anything, and that he is Special..Blah blah blah...Yep I bring up that he really has no clue.

If jump #'s don't matter..Why don't guys with 100 jumps win the nationals, or win the pro swoop tour?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kelel01 1]

Quote

Really? Pull before impact. I don't need to back that up. Don't turn low, Crash with your wings level, Don't run a PPO of higher than 1.6 while active, Breathe out while you accend. While I can back up each statment...If I don't that does not make them less true.

See, but you CAN come up with an explanation for these . . . don't pull; you'll bounce. Don't turn low; you pick up speed and might bounce. It's not, trust me, I have 3,000 jumps-- you need to pull. I think a whuffo could tell you that.

Kelly

[Ron 7]

Quote

See, but you CAN come up with an explanation for these . . . don't pull; you'll bounce. Don't turn low; you pick up speed and might bounce. It's not, trust me, I have 3,000 jumps-- you need to pull. I think a whuffo could tell you that.

I can come up with explanations why guys with 200 jumps should not be under a Velocity 96 as well...

The thing is they are "special" and will not listen.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

No, but given that the sub-100 jumper does not know as much. How is he to know what advice is good and what is bad?
....
Really? Pull before impact. I don't need to back that up. Don't turn low, Crash with your wings level, Don't run a PPO of higher than 1.6 while active, Breathe out while you accend. While I can back up each statment...If I don't that does not make them less true.

Advice that doesn't make sense and is not supported is bad advice, if only for the reason that it is easy for that person to ignore it. Basic human nature. You've given them no reason not to.

Some questions are easier to answer than others. Wingloading is pretty straightforward. Emergency procedures are less so - sometimes there is a right answer, and sometimes not. And then there is spotting....

Quote

You are a tech diver right? Well if I was planning a deep wreck dive that was clearly above my expereince level, and you told me it was above my level...I'd listen. I would not sit there and argue with you about it... How the hell do I think I know more than you if you are so much more expereienced?

I'm not more than what might be called "rec-tech." I am not willing to put all my spare time to diving to stay current enough to do true tech diving. I am familiar with many of the players, esp in Florida, but unfortunately they're all convinced the others are suicidal idiots. You won't get consistent answers from them, and a lot of scorn. The skydiving community is far friendlier to new people.

I've had the same problem with a guy I thought was pushing the ladder too fast. I thought it was 50/50 he would die or get badly bent. Fortunately he made it through till his experience started to catch up with his mind. I'm sure he saw me as a jealous preventing force.

My strategy is more about slowing down their pace and making sure they don't have bad equipment. Don't increase your max depth more than 20ft at a time. Don't carry Spare Airs. Twins or a buddy are usually a better choice than a pony. No unsecured gear. If you have to ask me if you can solo, the answer is no.

Quote

Thats when I tell them I have much more expereince than them...And of course they then say that jump numbers don't mean anything...

If jump #'s don't matter..Why don't guys with 100 jumps win the nationals, or win the pro swoop tour?

Anyone saying jump numbers doesn't mean anything is wrong. But it doesn't mean everything. Scuba instructors are some of the worst experienced divers out there. Some have thousands of dives - mostly to 40ft in the sand!

On the second question - ivory tower knowledge is much easier to come by than actual experience. Flight time is required to learn how to apply that knowledge, and to maintain a level of currency. BTW, I know I'm not a 12 jump wonder, and I won't be 100 jump one. I'm not even prepared to call myself average.

[Ron 7]

Quote

Advice that doesn't make sense and is not supported is bad advice, if only for the reason that it is easy for that person to ignore it. Basic human nature. You've given them no reason not to.

It still does not make it bad advice...I will grant you it could be bad delivery, but the ADVICE can still be sound.

Quote

Some questions are easier to answer than others. Wingloading is pretty straightforward

Then why do we have guys arguing it all the time? If it was so straight forward it would not be one of the most contended topics on here.

Quote

I've had the same problem with a guy I thought was pushing the ladder too fast. I thought it was 50/50 he would die or get badly bent. Fortunately he made it through till his experience started to catch up with his mind. I'm sure he saw me as a jealous preventing force.

The same way a good number of jumpers see me...You had good intentions...But you were trying to hold him back in his mind, and he just could not understand your point of view no matter how much you tried to explain it to him....It is then that communication breaks down. I'm sure you tried like hell to explain the situation to him, but he would not listen. It is those times that you just have to say "I have much more experience than you and I think you are wrong".

Quote

My strategy is more about slowing down their pace and making sure they don't have bad equipment. Don't increase your max depth more than 20ft at a time. Don't carry Spare Airs. Twins or a buddy are usually a better choice than a pony. No unsecured gear. If you have to ask me if you can solo, the answer is no

Just like I tell them not to downsize to quickly, and never depend on the saftey equipment.

But they don't want to listen....They think they can handle the fast pace. The cost of them being wrong is at times death. Thats a high price to pay.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[thelem 0]

Quote

Quote

he can't support his answer, the newbie would be a fool to rely on it.

Really? Pull before impact. I don't need to back that up. Don't turn low, Crash with your wings level, Don't run a PPO of higher than 1.6 while active, Breathe out while you accend. While I can back up each statment...If I don't that does not make them less true.

As has been pointed out above, answers like that CAN be supported. But more relevantly, they don't need to be supported because it is clear why the advice is being given (I don't understand the last 3 statements, but if I did then I'm sure I could easily think of a reason why you were giving that advice).

Saying "You shouldn't use and RSL" can also be supported, but just saying you have 3000 jumps so you know isn't enough.
Saying "Because you want to be stable to pull your reserve" justifies your advice. It also means that your advice can be challenged - eg "True, but are you likely to have the time to get stable, or will you just waste the few seconds before impact trying to get stable and therefore go in"

Then, seeing that there are 2 sides to the argument, the jumper can make up their own mind.

(and yes, I realise there are other arguments about RSLs, its just an example that I happened to be talking about at the weekend, please don't turn this into a thread about RSLs).

[crazy 0]

Quote

Then, seeing that there are 2 sides to the argument, the jumper can make up their own mind.

Then, instead of hammering an arbitrary advice, why not just bring out the 2 sides of the argument?

The benefits of the RSL are bla bla bla.
The drawbacks of the RSL are bla bla bla.
The risk of each situation relevant to the use of the RSL is high/low/negligible/variable (with such and such parameters).

Or even better:

What benefits can you think about for the RSL?
What are the drawbacks?
What's the risk of such and such situation?
Not bad! Maybe you should think a bit deeper about this and this aspects.

The top of the top would involve a mockup skydiver, with main, reserve and optional RSL. Just let a group of beginners play with it on their own and discretely assess later.

--
Come
Skydive Asia

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Some questions are easier to answer than others. Wingloading is pretty straightforward

Then why do we have guys arguing it all the time? If it was so straight forward it would not be one of the most contended topics on here.

1- the obvious.
2- the edge is not clearly defined. Does he cross the level of great danger at 1.1, 1.3, 1.5? It depends on the person and the chute as well. And even then it's a risk assessment.

But the notions of the risk are pretty straightforward. You load the wing more, you go faster, you fall faster, you have less time to plan and execute. No one contests these realities - just whether or not they are suitably experienced. You then tell them to prove it with a Pro test or something similar. If they can't or won't, they're obviously ignoring suggested norms for the sport. No question that your advice is sound.

You don't immediately suffer a convulsion when breathing oxygen at a PP of 1.6. The NOAA tables actually give 45 minutes exposure time for a light workload. For those reasons, most agencies have put the ceiling as 1.4 or 1.3. Yet if you had to spike to 2.0 to rescue someone, you'd probably make it ok, at a certain level of risk. You would do it to save your SO, but not some random stranger.

[Ron 7]

Quote

1- the obvious.
2- the edge is not clearly defined. Does he cross the level of great danger at 1.1, 1.3, 1.5? It depends on the person and the chute as well. And even then it's a risk assessment.

But the notions of the risk are pretty straightforward. You load the wing more, you go faster, you fall faster, you have less time to plan and execute. No one contests these realities - just whether or not they are suitably experienced.

Right then you sugest a test...And they say "You don't know what you are talking about.

Quote

If they can't or won't, they're obviously ignoring suggested norms for the sport.

Yep and at those times I think its perfectly fine to point out that the difference between the guy with 100 jumps knowledge on the subject is much less than the guys with 1000,2000,3000 more jumps.

Quote

Yet if you had to spike to 2.0 to rescue someone, you'd probably make it ok, at a certain level of risk.

I was told a 2.0 PPO was ok at rest..such as deco. Of course its been about 4 years since I did any staged deco time, and I could be way wrong.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[dmbale 0]

Everyone has opinions. I alone am responsible for what my decisions are and what advice I choose to take.

I have had younger instructors tell me that I am downsizing too slow (I jump a Spectre 190 loaded at about .76) and that I will regret it. I have had older instructors tell me to stick to F111 chutes for my first 100 jumps and I have had up jumpers try to talk me into jumping a 135 cross-braced canopy.

I took all of the advice, did my own research and decided that I am

a)going to downsize as slow or as fast as I am comfortable with (I am a bit older, have already been broken and don't need to prove anything to anyone but myself).

b)I wanted a Spectre and decided to ignore the advice of staying on F111 (I just wish that I had jumped a hybrid 210 sometime before going to the Spectre) It took 30 jumps on the Spectre but I stand up 99% of my landings now...even in no wind.

c) I have no business at my jump numbers and my difficulty with canopy control jumping a cross braced 135

Not all advice given is good advice and all advice is colored by our own experiences. I have instructors who are ultra conservative (the F111 advice) and others, usually younger that push the limits a bit more (but the one that said that I would regret downsizing slowly, had a line twist that he had to cut away from.....can't remember how small his canopy is).

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Not sure I understand why your instructors want you to stay on F-111 canopies (outside of being easier to pack). But I guess they have their reasons.

I fly a Spectre in my 2nd rig and have had a lot of fun with it shooting not only accuracy approaches, but also swooping with it. So it is a good choice for you.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

I've been doing a lot of thinking lately about the amount of good advice that is ignored in skydiving

I would have jumped into this thread earlier, but I was out of town this week.

If people could abstractly distinguish between good and bad advice, they probably wouldn't be approaching others for answers in the first place.

Right around the time of the Ancient Greeks, after millenia of walking the Earth, mankind finally figured out rules to guarantee the advice they followed was the pure, unadulterated good stuff. The Greeks might not have been the first to do so, but they remembered it long enough to write it down and share it with each other. Then for a while in the middle ages people stopped following the rules the Greeks laid out ... this era is now also known as the Dark Ages. Then along came a bunch of crackpots who dug up the Ancient Greek stuff, modernized it a bit and lo and behold we have the rebirth of mankind. In the ensuing Enlightenment we disseminate the rules of logic and reason in the hopes that they will permeate every facet of our existence.

Many people won't (and shouldn't IMO) take advice without good Reason. It is no surprise that advice given without good Reason is that most likely disregarded. The gospel of jump numbers, war stories, willingness to reiterate, etc. for all its glory is not part of what makes good advice.

nathaniel

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[Michele 1]

Ian:

Quote

I'd sincerely appreciate any answers. Maybe therein we'll be able to understand what makes people chose these paths and modify our teaching methods or approaches.

There has been some really interesting, and truthful, responses. But did they answer, for you, why someone "ignores" advice?

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[ianmdrennan 2]

Michele,

Quote

There has been some really interesting, and truthful, responses. But did they answer, for you, why someone "ignores" advice?

In some ways yes, in some ways no. A lot of it seems to stem down to personality type, some of it because people are just plain old stubborn (and will do the opposite of what you advise because at heart they're just difficult individuals) and some of it because people get conflicting advice.

I did learn that approach is the key to being successful with someone who wants to progress fast. Unfortunately not everyone responds well to the same approach. There's no easy way to go about it I suppose.

Interesting, but frustrating at the same time
Blue ones,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[NeedToJump 0]

Hey Ian, I'll throw my thoughts into this and I'll talk about my personal experiences.

As I've said on these forums I was one of those 200-jump wonders who got really lucky. For me it was definitely ego and thinking that I was special. I'd shop around until I got the answer I was looking for. It wasn't that I thought anyone else was trying to hold me back, it's that I thought that I could progress faster than they though I could.

Billvon's post describes my progression perfectly

Quote

People often make up their mind about doing something, but desire some reassurance that they are making the right decision. Thus they ask even though they've made up their mind. Also, some see criticism as a personal attack. You say "that might be too high a wing loading at your experience level" and they hear "your canopy skills suck." If they follow your advice they are admitting they suck, and thus must now jump the small canopy to prove they do not suck.

As this point I've learned to throw out the ego and be humble and actually listen to the advice given to me and I've become much safer and learned a lot faster. I am ALWAYS asking questions to the more experienced jumpers around (which is easy because there's a lot of them down here.)

I see people who are in the mindset that I had making all the same mistakes and being spoken to by some of the best skydivers in the world and still blowing off the advice. What can we say to actually get through to them before their luck runs out?

Wind Tunnel and Skydiving Coach http://www.ariperelman.com

[hookitt 0]

Quote

I never listened to my instructors because they were all stinky old farts who were so scared of my blinding talent that they were always BEGGING me to slow down, claiming I was at risk of injury. It was simply a matter of time before I made complete fools of them and showed just how stupid and conservative their advice was.

Unfortunately, an injury resulting from a low turn put me out of the sport for nearly a year due to a femur broken in 9 places.

They all acted SO concerned, although it was clear to me that they were releived. They claimed this relief was because I had not killed myself - but I knew it was because their senior position would remain unchallenged. The injury created a major setback to my learning curve, and those stinky old instructors still seem to have the edge on experience I so nearly had within my grasp.

I like this answer best

My grammar sometimes resembles that of magnetic refrigerator poetry... Ghetto

[Tonto 1]

Unfortunatly... the 1st two paragraphs are true. I was quietly arrogant. I listened, but took direction poorly.

This trait still exsists. I understand that wearing a helmet would be sensible. That NOTHING but a helmet would protect my head in a plane crash like the one I witnessed in 1992 at Perris - but still I refuse to wear one.

I have taken part of the advice though.

"t. Don't bash your head."

"OK!"

t

It's the year of the Pig.