For a period of over 80 years there was not a single catastrophic injury in Competitive Diving in the United States since its introduction to the Olympic Games. Then a rash of non-diving board injuries found to happen in shallow water were being attributed to those who were utilizing the diving boards. This misrepresentation was cause for serious concern for those of us who were Diving coaches. The word diving has been interpreted as entering the water in a head first manner. The statistical evidence never made a distinction as to where or what type of diving and into what depth caused the injuries. Diving simply was diving. Everything was lumped into one category, which led to the confusion we are still seeing today. Using the same logic that swimming is swimming if all drownings were classified as swimming accidents, the sport of swimming would be under the same safety microscope as diving.

The original concern for diving injuries from the use of diving boards was hitting the pool bottom (pre 1970’s). The potential for serious injury seemed great but there was no statistical evidence to back up the concern for catastrophic injuries in those shallower pools. Then facility changes in the pool depths (going from 8 to 9 and then10 feet deep) under a one meter board began to occur. Once those changes took place the incidents of injuries from hitting the pool bottom dropped to virtually nothing.

If one steps back and looks at how all of this progressed, one will notice a sort of cyclical pattern to the events that have placed diving on an endangered sports list. The whole issue started with catastrophic injuries in shallow water in the natural environment. That is people running from beaches into the water and diving into waves and hitting the sandy bottom with their head. Others ranged from diving off piers, from jetties and similar places into shallow water. People began looking at the diving board end of pools, which obviously had no relationship to the events that were occurring.

We then moved to hotel/motel pools that were too shallow and had a very small diving envelope for the use of diving boards. It was possible for adult size individuals to spring beyond the deepest part of these pools. Some incidents occurred after hours when the pool was not to be used. This issue sparked a controversy between the insurance industry and the trial lawyers who conducted suits against the hotel/motels. It is a controversy that is still ongoing today only it doesn’t include motel/hotels. Once the diving boards were removed the hotel/motel problem was solved but other shallow water incidents began to surface.

The first was diving into shallow water from the side of the pool. Then it moved to use of the starting blocks into shallow water, which had the high schools in turmoil. That turmoil was in regard to indecision with the use of high or low blocks in shallow or deep water. Also a specific type of dive start was outlawed and included the no false start rule in an attempt to stop this type of injury. Eventually the focus turned to the pool depth at the starting end and set a recommended depth of 5 feet. This prompted an article on this site called, "Starting In The Water".

Diving into above ground residential pools, which are generally 3 to 4 feet deep became a worldwide cause for concern. It seemed that every backyard had one because they were very affordable. People were diving off the ladders and decks that were built around those pools. Placement of these pools in a backyard sparked additional imagination for those pool users. Diving from a garage roof or an overhanging tree limb into these pools would produce catastrophic injuries and would also be classified as diving injuries.

The appearance of water slides into leisure pools led to more shallow water injuries. Originally the slide looked like a playground slide with a drop from the end of the slide into the swimming pool. It was a fun idea but not when it was placed in shallow water. If the patron went down head first, it was comparable to diving into shallow water. Eventually water slides positioned in shallow water were designed so that the slide’s exit was parallel to the bottom and the user would be in the water before the slide ended. Another precaution was that no one was allowed to go down headfirst in shallow water.

Most recently residential/apartment complex pools were the focus of diving board related injuries. These pools were very similar to the hotel/motel pools mentioned earlier. They have a relatively small diving area, which an adult sized individual could spring beyond and find him/herself landing in the shallow end. Generally these pools were not supervised and approximately 80% of the diving injuries in these pools were alcohol related. They were also misclassified as "Sports injuries".

Most of my "Search for Answers" uncovered the difference between residential/apartment complex pools and the public/municipal pools in relation to the size of the diving envelope (landing area). The larger envelope of public/municipal pools (including park districts) did not produce the catastrophic incidents that were later attributed to the smaller residential/apartment complex pools, which were regulated by the National Spa and Pool Institute.

The National Governing Board (U.S. Diving) continually endorses deeper pools with no consideration to the affordability of such pools or the affect that endorsement has in the legal arena. Deeper is not always better when considering the removal of diving boards in pools throughout the country. Should a minimum depth be established for diving? Yes! Many State Health Departments and the National Federation of High School Associations have set 10 feet as that minimum under I meter diving boards.

It is my opinion that the user must be aware of any change in facilities that occur before diving into various pools. I say that because the user has control of the moments prior to diving. The user will also be the one to suffer any consequences by diving in those facilities. On this web site is an article "For the Diver", which describes certain circumstances that may lead one to choose not to dive in a given facility.

Education is the key to assisting people with this knowledge so that they can make an informed decision. Let us not be naïve enough to think education alone will prevent these injuries. It is only one facet of the equation. Individual behavior and self-control are equally important in the prevention of injuries. As a society we like to believe that we can control one’s behavior. The majority of the population will follow rules and regulations realizing that they are set for safety reasons. However there will always be those few that will challenge those rules.

In another article on this site "How Deep Is Deep Enough?" a focus on the depth issue was discussed. The general public should be aware that all pools are not created equal. They have been designed with different depths and pool bottom configurations. The user must be aware of these differences. Even with deeper pools, the user must use caution when/if they decide to dive. If they are accustom to diving into 16 feet of water, then they must use caution and make the appropriate adjustments when the depth changes to 14, 12 or 10 feet. Diving has and will always consist of a series of compensations. It’s like walking. You must compensate for balance losses to move forward and then regain that balance to stop and remain standing. If you can’t make the appropriate adjustments, you will fall down. It is up to the user to ensure their own safety when making the final decision to dive or not to dive.

Until all pools have exactly the same depth and exactly the same pool bottom configurations, the user will always have to be aware of these differences and act accordingly. No lawyer or amount of money in a judgement can change the result of a catastrophic injury. Be safe and aware before diving anywhere. Think before you dive!

Diving from a diving board has been and is an extremely safe activity when compared to other activities and that point should be well documented by now. I could never understand the over-emphasized phrase, "potential for injury", in diving when athletes in other popular sports were actually experiencing catastrophic injuries and even dying on the field of play. Statistically speaking diving is much safer for the participant than for those who sit in the bleachers and watch them dive.

When and if diving is classified into the type of dive, type of pool and the depth where the incidents occur, diving from diving boards in public/municipal pools will be shown to be safer than ever imagined. That includes both recreational and competitive diving. All one has to do is delete all incidents that occur in shallow water and those that occur from diving boards in residential/apartment complex pools to see that. Now after over 100 years since the introduction of Diving into the Olympics there has been 1 catastrophic injury from the use of a diving board in a municipal pool. Hitting the pool bottom did not cause the diver’s injury. The diver landed on a swimmer sharing the diving area. It is an unfortunate incident that in my opinion could have been prevented. This incident demonstrates the reason I don’t believe depth is an issue in public/municipal pools anymore. It also demonstrates that the fear of a potential for injury by hitting the pool bottom in most public/municipal pools today is baseless unless it is in shallow water (5 to 6 feet or less). Those people who keep and/or refer to statistics must make this distinction when collecting statistics or doing research, otherwise there will always be this type of confusion that keeps Diving on the "Endangered Sports List".

Back To Current Topics