Not obviously, since you listed it third of four and fourth was roughly "swim where they can't grab you, and drag them back to shore while avoiding their grasp", which sounds pretty straightforward to an untrained reader.
It sounds pretty straightforward when you hear it, but execution is the real challenge. And if you execute it incorrectly, you run a serious risk of death.
To give an example of what can go wrong, your description suggests that you just hold the person where they can't reach you and drag them. But if you try that you'll find out the hard way that there is no good way to drag the person while they are still panicking without getting grabbed.
To give another problem, can you swim in place for a minute with your hands out of the water? Try it before confidently asserting that you can. And that is substantially easier than swimming in place, holding a struggling, panicked person up.
Those are among the reasons why I've so strongly recommended that untrained people avoid option #4. If you can stand on the bottom, fine. Otherwise, not so fine.
As a former lifeguard (certification has expired), I agree with btilly. Treading water without your hands was part of the test for this reason. Part of the training also involved being grabbed underwater by fellow trainees. Until you've actually been grabbed in a bear hug underwater, you can't really prepare yourself for what it feels like. And this is with someone who isn't panicking, and that you know will let go if you can't break their hold after a while.
Another important thing that they brought up in my training: the first thing to check for before going in to save someone (land or sea) is if the conditions are safe. As far as I know, every trained rescuer is told to put their own safety above the person or people they are trying to save. While I don't fault anyone that sacrifices themselves to save others, it doesn't make sense to add another death to what is already a tragedy.
I'm not a lifeguard -- I'm not even much of a swimmer -- but I am trained in First Aid. One of the things we were taught is not to just rush to be a hero when you come upon an apparent trouble situation. You first need to assess the situation and area with respect to the safety of yourself, and any bystanders.
Example scenario (based on a real life occurrence, as related by my instructor): You approach an indoor pool, and see what looks to be a child floating face down in the water, and an adult also floating similarly nearby. Your first instinct might be to dive in to save one or both of them, but a subtle clue is present: while the child is in swimming attire, the adult is in street clothes. In actual fact, a live wire has somehow come to be in contact with the water -- the adult had dived in to try to save the child, but was electrocuted.
What you said about people bear hugging you underwater reminds me of when I was on a swim team and we played a game called "Sharks and Minnows."
The lone shark starts at one end of a 25 meter pool, all the minnows at the other. The coach blows the whistle and all the minnows have to try to reach the other end without getting caught at the surface. Any minnows caught at the surface immediately become sharks. Repeat until there are no minnows.
I wasn't the fastest swimmer, but I could easily hold my breath from one end of the pool to the other, including wrestling underwater with sharks. If Sharks and Minnows were an Olympic sport I would have been competitive. Of course, that was when I was twelve ;-) At this point, I think I'd carefully consider how to approach an obviously drowning person.
I absolutely love the mechanics of that game. First of all it's a blast. But the cool part is that the game mechanics themselves ensure that everybody is safe. The minnows want to stay underwater to win the game, which is a secondary goal to wanting to breathe. And the sharks want to get the minnows to the surface to win the game. So fight it out as much as you want, but the minnows have to TRY to not breathe.
As a former Bronze Cross I also agree with btilly. I practiced swimming for thousands (training, competitively, and pleasure) of hours before having to save my first drowning victim. If you don't have the experience you are going to put yourself and the other person at great risk.
"Another important thing that they brought up in my training: the first thing to check for before going in to save someone (land or sea) is if the conditions are safe. As far as I know, every trained rescuer is told to put their own safety above the person or people they are trying to save."
Absolutely.
NOLS and the Sierra Club tell you the same thing, as well -- if you lead a hike for the Sierra Club and someone gets hurt, the FIRST thing you do is make sure the situation is safe. It doesn't do anyone any good if someone gets hurt and you get yourself hurt trying to get to them -- because now there are TWO victims.
I understand it once explained, I just said you should watch yourself before calling it obvious in future, because as someone untrained in lifeguarding or swimming - it isn't.
Or more specifically, watch yourself before deciding not to mention it because it's "obvious".
Why isn't it obvious that you don't really want to let someone drown almost to death? In any case I really didn't want to put too big a warning against #3 because I don't want to scare people away from that option if it is a choice between that and #4. Seriously, I don't.
As for you understanding the risks of #4 when explained, if you had understand it when it was first explained you shouldn't have responded as you did. Go back and re-read my original post. I said not once, but twice, that this was for trained people only. I further gave as two reasons the inability of untrained people to properly support a struggling person in the water, and the speed with which a mistake gets you killed. Yet your reaction was that #4 didn't look so bad.
I described #4 in the amount of detail I did because I thought people would be curious about it. But if people are going to misread my attempt to satisfy curiosity as a howto, it would have been much better for me to say no more than that going after a person drowning in water over your head is a recipe for suicide unless you have specialized training.
If you are in the middle of a lake and not a fairly well trained swimmer - it is really dangerous advice to try to drag them to shore and avoid their grasp. The swimmer could easily grab on to you and drown you both.
Don't underestimate a drowning swimmers ability to grab and hold you under the water - they are fighting for their life. It sounds ridiculous, but I have seen a small child do so to a large adult many times.
Don't think of this as lifeguard training,but you've basically got to get them over one shoulder or under an arm, then across the torso, while using your hip and a strong kick to basically pin them against your side so they have the least possible leverage to twist around and hug/climb you. Then you have to figure out how to swim them back with one arm. Sometimes it takes a couple tries. While a passive victim is closer to death the situation is usually safer for the rescuer, especially if inexperienced or untrained.
Not obviously, since you listed it third of four and fourth was roughly "swim where they can't grab you, and drag them back to shore while avoiding their grasp", which sounds pretty straightforward to an untrained reader.