Top Geocachers

[Cacheing In]

Does Geocaching.com compile a list of the top Geocachers by different

categories?

 

Some ideas:

 

Worldwide finds lifetime

By state lifetime

By country lifetime

By County lifetime

By type lifetime

By time (most found within a 24 hour period, month, year)

Worldwide finds within a month / year

By state within a month / year

By country within a month / year

By county within a month / year

By type within a month / year

 

Richard Ackley

San Rafael, CA

[+Airmapper]

I don't think so.

 

One site does something like that but I don't have a link.

 

You can look here and see the top finding cachers.

 

EDIT; to add, WELCOME!!!, I see your a first poster.

Edited December 22, 2005 by Airmapper

[+Renegade Knight]

There is a site that has the top geocachers and that's about it. There used to be another stats site that kept more types of stats and info but grounspeak pulled the plug on the data they needed to keep updated.

 

What you propose would be cool. While some people like to compete and some don't, most people like to cache and most people like some of the things you can do with the information needed to keep up with stats. I may not be the top cacher in my state, but I can be the top cacher...this week... Or in my town, or just better than my buddy in another town for a weekend. The more ways you split up stats the more fun people can have with it.

[Michael P]

Richard,

I'm relatively new, but your question does spark an interest. I know I would never be in the top running but it would be interesting to watch the progress of others in the RACE !

 

Micahel P

[+The Leprechauns]

Ummmm, it's not a race.

 

Is it?

 

Then I must be doing it wrong.

[+4leafclover]

Ummmm, it's not a race.

 

Is it?

 

Then I must be doing it wrong.

you and me both.

[+sept1c_tank]

Ummmm, it's not a race.

 

Is it? 

 

Then I must be doing it wrong.

It's not a race...yet, maybe a subspecies; it's not likely to become a race for many more generations.

[+Planet]

Nope, not a race and if it is you're running against yourself. Besides, can you really compare the cacher with a bazillion urban micro finds to the cacher with the bazillion miles hiked for 100 finds? My favorite slogan here is "It's not about the numbers". Because it isn't. For me it's about the places I get to see, the people I get to meet, and the things I get to learn.

 

and haha septic tank. that's funny

[+Greymane]

It IS about the numbers. (And mine is 63. Since they are serving 18, I am gonna sit back down and shut up.)

[+Allen_L]

Yep, it is about numbers and here is mine.

 

[+Team Perks]

Ummmm, it's not a race.

 

Is it?

Guess it depends on whether or not you're EMC, Bthomas, or the Ventura Kids.

[canadave]

Anyone who does a whole lot of geocaching just so they can get high up on such a "list" REALLY needs to get a life, or at least find something more productive to do. Even if I was the top geocacher of all time, I'd hope I was doing it for the fun of it and to meet new people.

 

Just my .02

Dave

[+bthomas]

for the fun of it and to meet new people.

 

I bump into new people all of the time: my fellow cachers by the bucket load, dogwalkers, soccer moms and dads, maintenace workers, police officers, rangers, mushroom hunters. Twice now, I've come across the number one cacher out in the field.

 

If it were just a numbers thing, I'd be caught up in my backlog of logging. Just finished logging a 50 set from 11/26 and a 60 set from 10/22. Just 600 or more to go.

[+The Leprechauns]

Anyone who does a whole lot of geocaching just so they can get high up on such a "list" REALLY needs to get a life, or at least find something more productive to do. Even if I was the top geocacher of all time, I'd hope I was doing it for the fun of it and to meet new people.

 

Just my .02

Dave

I've met nine of the top twenty geocachers on the list linked to above, and I've spent a good deal of time on cache hunts with several of them, including the person ranked #1. I can say with certainty that none of them have ever mentioned being at the top of a stats list as an important reason for continuing to find so many geocaches. In fact, several have told me they'd be just as happy if their totals were hidden from public view.

 

I think more of the "numbers" obsession comes at lower find counts. For example, after I passed 1,000 finds, I quit caring about milestones, or who was ahead of me or creeping up on me. I was initially disappointed when Dan's Stats Site went away, but in hindsight I am quite happy about that because since then I have focused more on my own numbers rather than comparing mine to someone else's.

[+NotThePainter]

I remember when I was driving in the Solo II National in Kansas. My times were awful and I couldn't even blame the car. The car owner was a top driver and had an almost top car and was in the top 5 I think. I was 48th out of 50 after the first day. I improved on the 2nd day making, finishing 47th out of 50 cars in my class.

 

A friend was looking over the results, trying somehow to cheer me up.

 

"Hey Paul, you're the fastest G-Stock driver from Massachusetts"

 

Some consolation...

 

Stats are fun though, aren't they.

 

Paul

[+ZingerHead]

This site requires users to enter their own stats - it doesn't seem to be as popular as the other site.

[+VegasCacheHounds]

I don't think so.

 

One site does something like that but I don't have a link.

 

You can look here and see the top finding cachers.

 

EDIT; to add, WELCOME!!!, I see your a first poster.

Wow, according to that site I've only got 6000 or so cachers that have more finds than me

[+Thrak]

My numbers are in my sig.

 

What? Those aren't the numbers you are talking about? Oh, well. My found stats are for me - I don't really need to compete for the stats. I cache for FUN!

[+caylor]

I'd like to be number one someday...but only because I outlived the rest of you.

[+edscott]

I'd like to be number one someday...but only because I outlived the rest of you. 

Sounds good but with a 40 year head start on many of you that's not likely for me

[+edscott]

Check here when you get to 200.

 

http://grand_high_pobah.home.comcast.net/California1.html

[+Criminal]

This is a horrible idea and will only lead to more poorly thought-out caches being placed.

 

My rant on the subject.

[+Cool Librarian]

Though I doubt many people do it SOLELY for the numbers, I do find myself getting annoyed when people indicate (or just plain old state) that being a numbers hunter is "wrong," and that those who say "It's not about the numbers" are somehow superior. It's sanctimonious - not to mention "incorrect."

 

There ARE people who do this for the numbers. For some people it IS a race. And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

Yes, I do get concerned about the quality of caches taking a dive because of competition in the game. But, we have a number of pretty "competitive" cachers in my neck of the woods, but the lowest microspew concentration in the country - so it doesn't necessarily follow.

 

At any rate, all of the cachers I know, numbers hounds included, cache because of their love of the outdoors, of adventures large and small. And if someone wants it to be "about the numbers" as well, then good for them.

[+wimseyguy]

Well, Criminal and the Sanctimonious Five (I'm sure there are moe than five-it just sounded good to me, kinda like a 60's pop band's name) can rant all they want, but for me it is all about the numbers; the number of time I can get out and have FUN looking for a silly container full of stuff I do not really care about, but someone hid it for me to find. So the higher my number, the more times I had fun.

Lists, we don't need no stinkin lists....

 

I was able to detour and have FUN on the way to the grocery store a few hours ago cuz someone hid one nearby, and it was in a very interesting location. A very poorly maintained old cemetery hidden away behind the Y and hemmed in by condos and apartments on either side.

 

PS I have also met and cached with many of the top cachers and have never heard any of them mention the actual count, or ranking as part of the motivation (well except for the Ventura Kids, but he was just mugging for the camera in the documentary, wasn't he? )

[+shorbird]

I'm still fairly new at this, but although my stats are interesting in a casual way, they're not why I do it. I just love to find things, and go to different places. Seeing new places is a much higher payoff for me than the numbers. I get a kick out of the clever caches, too--if I can find them!!

[+Teamhawaii1981 & blueicyrose]

I’ll find some appeal in all caches regardless of the rating

Even if the hider was unaware of any such charm

 

- From Criminal's Poem

 

These were the best line and the truest. I would like to think my logs convey as much.

[+Bluejaytoo]

Besides, can you really compare the cacher with a bazillion urban micro finds to the cacher with the bazillion miles hiked for 100 finds?  My favorite slogan here is "It's not about the numbers". 

Why couldn't it also be about the types of finds, as the OP mentioned? I'd be more interested in seeing who has the most 5/5 finds, or even the most widely-scattered finds. I've been doing this since '02, and my number is still two digits; so it certainly isn't about the numbers for me! When we head out, we purposely look for the cache that is most likely to take our entire day.

[CoyoteRed]

There ARE people who do this for the numbers. For some people it IS a race. And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

Yes, I do get concerned about the quality of caches taking a dive because of competition in the game. But, we have a number of pretty "competitive" cachers in my neck of the woods, but the lowest microspew concentration in the country - so it doesn't necessarily follow.

Well, there would be nothing wrong with it if everyone was like those in your area.

 

Unfortunately, it's not.

 

Don't judge the whole concept of microspew (it's not just micros, but any junk cache placed solely to increment someone else's find count) just on your area. Other areas it is happening. Others have even tried in import it into areas where it's not wanted. So, yes, it happens. Yes, there is something wrong with that.

Edited December 23, 2005 by CoyoteRed

[+Ambrosia]

I am inveencable!

 

 

[+JDandDD]

Does Geocaching.com compile a list of the top Geocachers by different

categories?

 

Some ideas:

 

Worldwide finds lifetime

By state lifetime

By country lifetime

By County lifetime

By type lifetime

By time (most found within a 24 hour period, month, year)

Worldwide finds within a month / year

By state within a month / year

By country within a month / year

By county within a month / year

By type within a month / year

 

Richard Ackley

San Rafael, CA

Ok. pet peeve of mine, calling cachers with high numbers of finds 'top cachers'. It doesn't make them a top cacher just someone who does a lot of caches. Either that or they live in an area with a lot more caches available than my area. I can find all the cachers that someone who has found 2000 can even though I've done only a little better than a tenth so the numbers represent nothing about skill leverl after about 100 finds.

 

All numbers signify is that people have a lot more time to do this sport than I do. For me, numbers signify very little other than after a person does near 100 caches it can tell you they are good at it and you can trust their DNF a bit more than a person with 12 finds.

 

For some people numbers are hugely important, for us rather unimportant and don't see what it would do to keep lists of them.

 

JDandDD

Edited December 24, 2005 by JDandDD

[+Roamingbull]

Stats are all about what goals you set for yourself. It is almost impossible to do a true stat page for this game. You have too many variables and unequal grounds. Some people have a thousand or more finds and can say they found each one individually. Some cachers are actually a group or an organization where several people share and log into the same account. Some married folks share an account, while some don't. Then you toss locationless caches into the stats and that can rack a lot of numbers up. So the numbers someone has may not represent a true record of what one person has actually found by themselves in the field. I like that you can look at stats for fun, and it does give you some people to look up to, but if your in this for a competition, you really have to do it against yourself, or find cachers in your area you know are caching like you do. That's my take on this post. Take care

Edited December 28, 2005 by Roamingbull