Overgrowncubscout

Puzzle caches irk me, the point of Geocaching is to get outside not to sit in on my butt in front of a computer googling random quotes, images or ciphers or just trying to get into some random persons head to try and figure out what he/she was thinking. Why are you sitting in front of a computer complaining? You could be challenging your mind with a really good puzzle. Just had to do that.

That's another big time irk! Cache owners that don't use the GC rating system when choosing their D/T ratings. Sometimes it seems like the CO pulled the numbers out of a hat. The link to the rating system is pretty obvious on the online form. Some people with mobility issues rely on accurate T ratings. It's frustrating and a waste of time and gas money when a T2 or under geocache turns out to be a T3 (or over) cache - steep slope, rock pile, bushwack through trees and logs, tree climb. I'm 100% on board with poor D/T ratings as my #1 irk. My son and I cache together & he is physically disabled (so yes there are cachers in wheel chairs). We have some CO's in our area that hide great caches in spectacular area's including awesome multi's and puzzles, that just blow it when it comes to D/T ratings. I've learned to talk to other finders of high quality potential caches, to really understand what we are getting into. We'll do 3 & 4 terrain caches, but need to plan ahead and bring along help for the rough spots. BTW - If you asked my son what irks him, he'd say LPC's! Do you find caches with pointlessly high D/T ratings annoy you as well? I remember one I found in Pennsylvania that was rated something like 2.5/3 and turned out to be at ground level within about 30 feet of the parking, along a flat gravel path. As an able-bodied cacher I was left puzzled why the terrain was as high as 3 and reading your post I wondered if caching with your son would have left the two of you expecting a challenge and allocating time/resources/etc only to find you could park the car and realise the cache is at the foot of the tree over there. Yes. It seems to me that the way the new cache rating icons are displayed while using the cache listing tool are pretty clear. I can see how we all could be off by a 1/2 a point in either direction, but full point or more seems rediculous. For terrain ratigs: I also find that some CO's who do use the grade factor only do not always take into account things such as rocks, roots, thorns, slippery surfaces like the shale creek beds we have in my area. IMO - The problem starts with some CO's not recognizing a 5 D or T for the general population. There are certain criteria that makes a 5 a 5, once this criteria is met there may be additional difficulty to the find or the terrain, but it's still just a 5. If a CO has found that crazy hard 5/5 hide (i.e. a nano disguised as a twig hidden 20' up a tree that's growing 100' up a 200' sheer cliff face, after solving a backwards Baconian cypher puzzle to get to leg 1 of a 12 part multi to get to this final) Every cache that is slightly easier does not become a 4 1/2D x 4 1/2T or less. Oops... I just explained my next hide that I'll release next April fools day as a 1/1 with leg 1 being a LPC in a Walmart parking lot. [:b] Sorry for the long winded explanation. I have lots of thoughts on this subject because it irks me so much. I am a big advocate of using the rating system and making small adjustments as needed, always! Per the rating system, I am capable of getting to a 4T cache, and would have to use my judgement on a 4.5T. What messes things up is when our local guy who hikes 40 miles each and every week of his life and has bagged the 200 highest peaks in the US, places a 4.4T and rates it as a 2.5T based on his abilities, instead of the rating system. We have the same type guy here. The bummer is he hides caches in some of the nicest places, & creates excellent puzzles. My son and I are learning to bump his ratings up by 1 1/2 no matter what. Too bad we don't get the well rounded cacher credit for finding them though.

I am the able bodied "Buddy" of my son who has CP. Unlike some folks, his abilities are improving rather than deteriorating. I see geocaching as one of the positive factors in his ability to get outside, get exercise, get stronger and more agile. He now can walk using a forearm crutch in one hand while given balance assistance with the other. He can do this for short distances but becomes fatigued easily. We use an "off road" chair that has disk breaks for safely getting up and down steep hills and a kicker peg on the back so I can get the front wheels off the ground to get over rocks, logs, roots etc. We use this for long distance hikes in the woods, but my son makes sure I park the chair and he hikes the last .1 mile at a minimum. Another cacher mentioned the handicacging website. I have entered info on some of my caches on that site, and my son and I even did an accessible cache series. We did it for fun, but also to raise awareness in our community that there is a cacher with physical disabilities in our community. Unfortunately we have not seen the handicacging link on any new listings despite all the favorite points some of the accessible caches received. It's a great site because it answers the question "If I can see it and I can get to it, can I still reach it?" As I mentioned in on other board, my son hates LPC's (I don't care either way) We both truly enjoy trails in the woods with caches just off the trail, just like Groundspeak describes in the geocaching 101 training video we watched a couple years ago.

That's another big time irk! Cache owners that don't use the GC rating system when choosing their D/T ratings. Sometimes it seems like the CO pulled the numbers out of a hat. The link to the rating system is pretty obvious on the online form. Some people with mobility issues rely on accurate T ratings. It's frustrating and a waste of time and gas money when a T2 or under geocache turns out to be a T3 (or over) cache - steep slope, rock pile, bushwack through trees and logs, tree climb. I'm 100% on board with poor D/T ratings as my #1 irk. My son and I cache together & he is physically disabled (so yes there are cachers in wheel chairs). We have some CO's in our area that hide great caches in spectacular area's including awesome multi's and puzzles, that just blow it when it comes to D/T ratings. I've learned to talk to other finders of high quality potential caches, to really understand what we are getting into. We'll do 3 & 4 terrain caches, but need to plan ahead and bring along help for the rough spots. BTW - If you asked my son what irks him, he'd say LPC's! Do you find caches with pointlessly high D/T ratings annoy you as well? I remember one I found in Pennsylvania that was rated something like 2.5/3 and turned out to be at ground level within about 30 feet of the parking, along a flat gravel path. As an able-bodied cacher I was left puzzled why the terrain was as high as 3 and reading your post I wondered if caching with your son would have left the two of you expecting a challenge and allocating time/resources/etc only to find you could park the car and realise the cache is at the foot of the tree over there. Yes. It seems to me that the way the new cache rating icons are displayed while using the cache listing tool are pretty clear. I can see how we all could be off by a 1/2 a point in either direction, but full point or more seems rediculous. For terrain ratigs: I also find that some CO's who do use the grade factor only do not always take into account things such as rocks, roots, thorns, slippery surfaces like the shale creek beds we have in my area. IMO - The problem starts with some CO's not recognizing a 5 D or T for the general population. There are certain criteria that makes a 5 a 5, once this criteria is met there may be additional difficulty to the find or the terrain, but it's still just a 5. If a CO has found that crazy hard 5/5 hide (i.e. a nano disguised as a twig hidden 20' up a tree that's growing 100' up a 200' sheer cliff face, after solving a backwards Baconian cypher puzzle to get to leg 1 of a 12 part multi to get to this final) Every cache that is slightly easier does not become a 4 1/2D x 4 1/2T or less. Oops... I just explained my next hide that I'll release next April fools day as a 1/1 with leg 1 being a LPC in a Walmart parking lot. [:b] Sorry for the long winded explanation. I have lots of thoughts on this subject because it irks me so much.

That's another big time irk! Cache owners that don't use the GC rating system when choosing their D/T ratings. Sometimes it seems like the CO pulled the numbers out of a hat. The link to the rating system is pretty obvious on the online form. Some people with mobility issues rely on accurate T ratings. It's frustrating and a waste of time and gas money when a T2 or under geocache turns out to be a T3 (or over) cache - steep slope, rock pile, bushwack through trees and logs, tree climb. I'm 100% on board with poor D/T ratings as my #1 irk. My son and I cache together & he is physically disabled (so yes there are cachers in wheel chairs). We have some CO's in our area that hide great caches in spectacular area's including awesome multi's and puzzles, that just blow it when it comes to D/T ratings. I've learned to talk to other finders of high quality potential caches, to really understand what we are getting into. We'll do 3 & 4 terrain caches, but need to plan ahead and bring along help for the rough spots. BTW - If you asked my son what irks him, he'd say LPC's!