Level Rating For Caches

[Cannondale Express]

Having recently started geocaching, I find the rating system confusing. Yes, I know that higher the number, the higher the difficulty. However, looking for some of the easier caches seemed more difficult that the harder one's. I would appreciate help from some of the more seasoned cachers on giving qualitative examples of levels 1 - 5 and if possible give specific examples. I appreciate the help.

[+NevaP]

I find the difficulty ratings very subjective, especially for micros because I happen to be one of those people who can't see a bison tube hanging right in front of me and I never seem to be peering under the bench at the right angle to see the key holder stuck under there. However, for most caches a 1 or 2 difficulty rating means it's placed in a fairly conventional way and as you get more caches located you learn what those ways are. A 3 or 4 difficulty rating usually means there is something tricky or clever about the way the cache is hidden or the cache is difficult to reach or retrieve. But once you have seen some of the more common trick containers and placements they may not fool you again. So again it is subjective. A 5 difficulty rating should be reserved for something really diabolical or a multi stage cache like this one

which takes 8 to 10 hours to complete. But some people will overestimate the difficulty. Descriptions and logs will often tell you more about the real difficulty of the cache than the ratings do. And experience really does help.

 

A terrain rating of 1 is supposed to mean wheel chair accessible and 5 is supposed to mean that special equipment (a boat, scuba gear, climbing gear) and or skills are needed but these are not always correctly applied. And the 2-3-4 terrain ratings can also be subjective. It's common out here in the midlands for Nebraskans to complain that a Colorado 2 terrain rating is really a 4 while the Colorado people say the opposite about Nebraska caches.

[bogleman]

The previous post covered alot of the bases. The question you asked is a very tough question to answer giving any "real" results. What I feel is a hard cache may be an easy cache to others. I have been able to turn an easy 1* cache into a 4.5* cache just by the way I approached the cache location. Some folks love using clever containers and hide them in plain sight, you have no idea what you are looking for so expand your thoughts and see beyond what is right in front of you. Now if I wanted to hide a cache here where would I put it. A micro can nearly be ANY type of container. Small and regular caches can be hidden the same way - don't forget to look UP, I find myself always looking on the ground and then later find the cache hidden above ground level.

[+The Leprechauns]

From the Geocache Rating System:

 

* Easy. In plain sight or can be found in a few minutes of searching. 

** Average. The average cache hunter would be able to find this in less than 30 minutes of hunting. 

*** Challenging. An experienced cache hunter will find this challenging, and it could take up a good portion of an afternoon. 

**** Difficult. A real challenge for the experienced cache hunter - may require special skills or knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days / trips to complete. 

***** Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache. 

 

There are many variations regionally, etc., but this is the closest we have to an objective standard for an inherently subjective measuring scale.

 

There is a terrain rating system at that site too, but you asked about difficulty.

 

As a somewhat experienced geocacher, I oftentimes find myself stumped on difficulty 1 to 2 hides, because I am overthinking them. Yes, it really *IS* in that obvious spot -- not in the diabolically evil spot that you thought it was in because it reminded you of that difficulty 4 cache you found two years ago in California.