Motorway Mayhem Caches

[Deego]

Firstly, can I say I have no problem with Motorway Mayhem caches, as variety is the spice of life but I am just trying to pre-empt what I think will happen with the 24 hour records in the future.

 

Over the weekend 3 cachers did 45 Motorway Mayhem caches, so do we need to exclude these from the existing 24 hour records, before somebody else sets a few of the records, with one well planed day on the motorway system?

 

So lets have a show of fingers, please start your post with YES or NO (1 vote per person )

 

NO if we should

 

Exclude all Motorway Mayhem caches in the existing 24 hour records and set up a new 24 hour record for MM caches only*

 

Or

 

YES if we should

 

Keep it as it is, all caches are caches and should count to record attempts, if we don't count MM caches where do we draw the line next ?

 

Right! that's the blue touch paper burning, I will now retreat to a safe distance.

 

Please discuss..........

 

* Nobody has requested this record yet

[+HazelS]

Keep them in...

 

If we start removing them for the record attempts will we then have to start removing them for COTM????

[+Brenin Tegeingl]

NO.

 

MM's caches are in my opinion building into a "mega power trail". I've no objections to that as long as their not used for setting records as no major planning is involved in the attempt you just follow the Motorways, and hey presto the planning is done for you! The 24hr and county records both involved detail planning before hand by those who set them, where some times the next nearest cache is not always the best one to do. Give them their own record status.

 

Also restrict to 1 or 2 MM caches in any future attempt at the county record otherwise it will simply devalue the county record as well!

 

Dave-Flame proof suit on, but still going in to hidding

[+Haggis Hunter]

YES

 

I haven't attempted any records, but where do you draw the line? There is nothing to stop the actual record holders from going out and securing there current records with MM caches.

 

It is all just a bit of fun after all!!

[Nediam]

YES

 

"Keep it as it is, all caches are caches and should count to record attempts"

 

Don't forget that there are other "power trails" such as the Kennet and Avon canal series near Newbury. I believe this series has been used in the past to set record attempts?

 

I would think it's probably easier (and cheaper, and better scenery, and more relaxing) to do a shed load of caches around one area such as Oxford, London or Bershire than it is to spend a day sat in traffic getting stressed.

Edited March 3, 2006 by Nediam

[alistair_uk]

I agree that they are in line with a power trail and would agree that it is probably best to treat them as the same. Do we exclude power trails from any records? Perhaps we should have a record using power trails and one without. ...so Yes and No

[+Cave Troll and Eeyore]

NO.

 

MM's caches are in my opinion building into a "mega power trail". I've no objections to that as long as their not used for setting records as no major planning is involved in the attempt you just follow the Motorways, and hey presto the planning is done for you! The 24hr and county records both involved detail planning before hand by those who set them, where some times the next nearest cache is not always the best one to do. Give them their own record status.

 

Also restrict to 1 or 2 MM caches in any future attempt at the county record otherwise it will simply devalue the county record as well!

 

Dave-Flame proof suit on, but still going in to hidding

I agree with Dave on this one.

[+purple_pineapple]

NO

 

As I understand it, we currently have a separate record for caches in 24 hours in London. I presume this is because it was felt at the time that these were easier, and recognition should be made of 24 hr records outside of London, which are probably harder. Personally, I would be in favourr of a separate record for the MM series, along side the London record.

 

As an aside, I agree that caching in London might well be easier and quicker than the MM series, and certainly cheaper! Oxford, on the other hand, was, for me, neither easier, quicker, and was probably one of the most stressful cache trips we've had! But thats another thread....

 

Dave

[+adambro]

I'd say YES, keep it as it is. I don't think its fair to discriminate simply because the caches have 'Motorway Mayhem' in their name. Drive by caches are nothing new.

 

But the series is getting quite popular, 69 the last time I updated my bookmark list of them. If the max you can have on a list is still 100, I fear i'm going to be struggling soon.

[Deego]

Yes 4 No=3

 

 

I know the records are just a bit of fun but I just want to keep it as controlled as possible

Edited March 3, 2006 by Deego

[+Moote]

Opinion

 

Maybe 2 sets of records would do the trick; Most in 24hrs without MM caches and Most including MM caches, we did 45 (One not an MM cache) in under 16hrs so a UK record could in theory have been broken if we carried on and cached at the same rate, also we did not pick up any extra caches on the rout bar the one mentioned, so I bet a MM inclusive record could be in the 80's, as we had several long drives without a cache being bagged. As for me will I get the record? I doubt it I've cleared most of them off my list

[+CrazyL200]

NO.

 

MM's caches are in my opinion building into a "mega power trail". I've no objections to that as long as their not used for setting records as no major planning is involved in the attempt you just follow the Motorways, and hey presto the planning is done for you! The 24hr and county records both involved detail planning before hand by those who set them, where some times the next nearest cache is not always the best one to do. Give them their own record status.

 

Also restrict to 1 or 2 MM caches in any future attempt at the county record otherwise it will simply devalue the county record as well!

 

Dave-Flame proof suit on, but still going in to hidding

 

My vote is NO - and agree with all Mancunian Pyrocaher says, in particular devaluing the the way records need to be planned.

 

Motorway Mayhem - simply jump in your car and do a round robin of motorways and hey presto, you've several records in one go. The only way then to beat that record is to keep pushing the driving speed up on the motorway. I think this would encourage motorway speeding - not good from the point of view of promoting the sport. Both in the press, to the authorities and to new cachers.

 

Yes, it's up to us which caches we do and in what way, but don't add this to the record attempts (it's only a bit of fun, but some will take it seriously).

If needed, give them a unique set of records.

Most in 24 hours - (encouraging speeding on the motorways ??)

Fastest 100 - (encouraging speeding on the motorways ??)

Quickest time to do them all ..... but that will never mean anything because there's new ones all the time.

 

I can just see the headlines..................

[+Hillhappy1]

No

 

For all the reasons others have given above.

Edited March 3, 2006 by Hillhappy1

[+Moote]

Vote

 

Forgot to vote when I commented, Vote = No

[Deego]

Vote

 

 

Thats not on your list

[+Moote]

Vote

 

 

Thats not on your list

Concerned

 

Are you sure of that Deego

[+Stuey]

YES: These MM caches are hardly what you would call a power trail are they? I reckon you can get from cache to cache in Oxford by bike quicker than some of the MM caches. Let them count.

[+Moote]

Discussion

 

If MM Caches are to be treated just like any other cache, then why should London get special dispensation for a record? Surely MM caches also stand on their own merit, just as London does.

[+mongoose39uk]

Having been involved in chasing the mm caches at weekend. I dont think they need to be in a seperate category.

 

They are nothing special, in fact in general I would not bother with most of them. They certainly do not stretch your finding skills.

 

Keep them in with the others they do not deserve a separate category.

 

Sorry if that sounds a bit negative towards the mm caches some of them are OK and I am sure some will be good. Just not for me!

 

Cheers

 

Tony

[Deego]

I don't mind adding a MM record for 24 hrs

 

The London record was the first (If I remember correctly) the rest were added afterward. When there was interest shown in them.

[Deego]

Having been involved in chasing the mm caches at weekend. I dont think they need to be in a seperate category.

 

They are nothing special, in fact in general I would not bother with most of them. They certainly do not stretch your finding skills.

 

Keep them in with the others they do not deserve a separate category.

 

Sorry if that sounds a bit negative towards the mm caches some of them are OK and I am sure some will be good. Just not for me!

 

Cheers

 

Tony

 

But if somebody broke your County's record using only MM caches would that be fair??

Edited March 3, 2006 by Deego

[+mongoose39uk]

I don't mind adding a MM record for 24 hrs

 

The London record was the first (If I remember correctly) the rest were added afterward. When there was interest shown in them.

 

If you really must Brian

 

Just think there are better way to get records than putting them in tom tom and driving till it says stop

[+Happy Humphrey]

Yes, keep them in. The only valid point I've seen so far is that they could encourage speeding: but I suppose that applies to any set of caches when there's so many to get round in 24 hours. As far as the London record is concerned, I think that this could be merged into the general 24hr record but I wouldn't be bothered either way.

 

I can't see what's wrong with power trails if they are labelled as such: you can choose to log them, or not, as you prefer.

 

HH

[+Jonovich]

Yes, of course include them in records. Plus, the UK motorways are not that easy to navigate and dependable to rely upon for an unhindered journey

 

Jon

[+Woody's Wanderers]

Yes, keep them in.

[+Alibags]

YES

 

Keep them in... it's the thin end of the wedge there. Besides, when planning such a record attempt, you would naturally look for drive bys, cache and dashes and 1/1 caches, so that's exactly what these are. It's not as bad as the power trails which I believe exist in other countries (which shall remain nameless) where caches are places 0.1 mile away from each other, along a road or even a parking lot*, specifically to scoop up numbers. I may frown upon the latter.

 

*oops! that gives it away!, LOL

[NickPick]

YES

 

Keep them in - A cache is a cache is a cache, they all count for the numbers, and that's what records are all about.

[+Mr'D]

YES,

 

I don't agree with the general concept, but how can one monitor/police such 'power trails'?

 

It's another challenge, and at the end of the day just another cache for us sane cachers who strive to enjoy the sport.

 

Jon

[+CrazyL200]

So, the following records will all be achievable in one go by doing a blast around the motorways - once there's enough of them out there.

 

Most UK in 24 hours (current record = 54)

Most counties in 24 hours (current record = 27 (England))

Most in a week (current record = 114)

Most in a month (current record = 216)

Quickest 100 (current record = 5 days)

 

Surely, they deserve a "class" of their own.

Most in 24 hours

Fastest 100

[+Pengy&Tigger]

YES

 

It's no different to having lots of caches in any other places, and you do still have to travel to do them. I think if we start having too many 24 hour records, it's going to get silly. Someone could then argue for having a separate record for Oxford, a separate record for Ridgeway Run caches etc.etc.

 

MM is just another series as far as I'm concerned, and what if someone wanted a stab at the 24 hour record and include both MM and non-MM caches?

 

For the record, once someone breaks our record for 55 in a day anywhere, we should unify the records and have just the one for caches in 24 hours plus the pedal bike one. There are so many cache dense areas now, that I don't think there is a noticeable difference in the cache density of London compared to some other places.

 

T

[+Pieman]

Maybe 2 sets of records would do the trick; Most in 24hrs without MM caches and Most including MM caches, we did 45 (One not an MM cache) in under 16hrs

 

JOKE

 

Blimey, 44 MM caches in under 16 hours- I've just done 2 in 3 weeks and I thought that was overdoing it.

[Nediam]

Slightly on topic

 

Is the plan to have a cache near every motorway junction?

 

If so, then does anyone know how many junctions there are in total?

 

and....

 

I assume that would then limit the series to a set number of caches?

 

Sorry for the (slight) hijack Deego, but yet another Motorway Mayhem topic would be a bit too much!

[+alma]

YES

 

Keep them in - A cache is a cache is a cache, they all count for the numbers, and that's what records are all about.

 

YES

 

It's no different to having lots of caches in any other places, and you do still have to travel to do them. I think if we start having too many 24 hour records, it's going to get silly. Someone could then argue for having a separate record for Oxford, a separate record for Ridgeway Run caches etc.etc.

 

MM is just another series as far as I'm concerned, and what if someone wanted a stab at the 24 hour record and include both MM and non-MM caches?

 

For the record, once someone breaks our record for 55 in a day anywhere, we should unify the records and have just the one for caches in 24 hours plus the pedal bike one. There are so many cache dense areas now, that I don't think there is a noticeable difference in the cache density of London compared to some other places.

 

T

[+The Klever Boys]

YES

 

Keep them in.

As previously said, they're no different from other individual driveby caches that would be counted.

 

Good debate though!

[+scooby scrappy and mp]

YES keep them in

 

Michelle

[+The Hancock Clan]

It's a yes from us too.

 

There's nothing wrong with a few easy numbers - and statistically they only count the once

[+Kitty Hawk]

I tend towards no, but I suppose it doesn't matter.

 

The reason I tend towards No is that that if I were the holder of an existing record - (so Moote, Mongoose, Penger & Tigger, Hurigan Hoopers, 2C's, Volvoman and Seasider) I'd feel a little cheated if my record was taken by someeone just trolling around the motorways. (perhaps not the cycling one )

 

I agree that they would have done the research to find the 1/1's etc, but that's the effort & the reward. Just having a petrol budget and looking up keyword Mayhem seems too easy.

[+John Stead]

Yes from me or we would have to grade all our caches for record purposes - anyone who is nuts enough to race round our motorways just for caches is welcome to them, especially if they are as weak as the only one I have done so far. If I'd realized I could have wound down my window and reached it from the car, though I would probably have been plastered on the front of an artic if I had!

[alistair_uk]

Most UK in 24 hours (current record = 54)

Most counties in 24 hours (current record = 27 (England))

Most in a week (current record = 114)

Most in a month (current record = 216)

Quickest 100 (current record = 5 days)

What about the record of “getting the wettest while caching”. I am in with a chance for that one.

[+Pieman]

Yes from me or we would have to grade all our caches for record purposes - anyone who is nuts enough to race round our motorways just for caches is welcome to them, especially if they are as weak as the only one I have done so far. If I'd realized I could have wound down my window and reached it from the car, though I would probably have been plastered on the front of an artic if I had!

Having done the one John has- have to agree.

[+HazelS]

Yes from me or we would have to grade all our caches for record purposes - anyone who is nuts enough to race round our motorways just for caches is welcome to them, especially if they are as weak as the only one I have done so far. If I'd realized I could have wound down my window and reached it from the car, though I would probably have been plastered on the front of an artic if I had!

Having done the one John has- have to agree.

 

Ahh, yes, but not all are the same... I had the place for my MM cache mapped out and I knew how close it was to the motorway, so I made it a MM cache - that might have been a mistake on my part, it's not just a micro shoved in a bush, but it IS a drive by, although now that I've had permission to place it in the place I wanted to place it in the 1st place (!) it'll not be a drive by.

[+John Stead]

I agree Hazel - I was too sweeping and have no doubt that many are worth the stop. I still like the idea of them carrying references to good refreshment places.

[+marinor]

yes or no

 

makes no difference to me one way or the other

 

stay safe

Bill

[+Moote]

Ahh, yes, but not all are the same... I had the place for my MM cache mapped out and I knew how close it was to the motorway, so I made it a MM cache - that might have been a mistake on my part, it's not just a micro shoved in a bush, but it IS a drive by, although now that I've had permission to place it in the place I wanted to place it in the 1st place (!) it'll not be a drive by.

Opinion

 

Hazel, to be honest about your cache, of the 44 MM caches I have done it is most certainly one of the best ones, in fact I would rate it high as a very good drive by cache.

[+Cave Troll and Eeyore]

Ahh, yes, but not all are the same... I had the place for my MM cache mapped out and I knew how close it was to the motorway, so I made it a MM cache - that might have been a mistake on my part, it's not just a micro shoved in a bush, but it IS a drive by, although now that I've had permission to place it in the place I wanted to place it in the 1st place (!) it'll not be a drive by.

Opinion

 

Hazel, to be honest about your cache, of the 44 MM caches I have done it is most certainly one of the best ones, in fact I would rate it high as a very good drive by cache.

 

Moote should your post not be headed with "Grovel"

[SlytherinAlex]

YES, of course. Are we getting to the stage of people wanting to think that their record is better than anyone elses?

 

A cache, is a cache is a cache. There have always been easy ones and hard ones. Doing loads of caches tucked under benches in London parks isn't exactly brain surgery is it?

 

The whole concept of records is fundamentaly flawed anyway as from one day to the next there are different numbers of caches. So records continually get easier to beat as cache concentration increases. There was a time when we had done every available cache in W Yorkshire, S Yorkshire, N Yorkshire, E Yorkshire, Grt Manchester, Cheshire, Merseyside, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire (plus any counties that didn't have any caches in late 2001). Anyone beat that?? So we can claim the record for clearing the most counties.

 

Records don't matter and starting to take them too seriously misses the point of the game.

[+HazelS]

Ahh, yes, but not all are the same... I had the place for my MM cache mapped out and I knew how close it was to the motorway, so I made it a MM cache - that might have been a mistake on my part, it's not just a micro shoved in a bush, but it IS a drive by, although now that I've had permission to place it in the place I wanted to place it in the 1st place (!) it'll not be a drive by.

Opinion

 

Hazel, to be honest about your cache, of the 44 MM caches I have done it is most certainly one of the best ones, in fact I would rate it high as a very good drive by cache.

 

JOKE

 

Good God... a recommendation from Moote... I'll have to print that out and frame it!

[+badger]

I think these records should only stand if the cachers can log them on GC.com in the same 24 hour period...

Edited March 5, 2006 by mattwaggie

[alistair_uk]

I think these records should only stand if the cachers can log them on GC.com in the same 24 hour period...

That wouldn’t be fare, it takes me hours after a long day caching to log the finds. Perhaps if I list logged “Found it”, but where is the fun in that.

[+HazelS]

I think Matt was being Matt - Sarcastic!!!