How Do You Define a Numbers Ho?

September 4, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'

How do you define that term?

I would prefer that the big number finders really NOT be the ones discussed here, but rather the smaller number finders who somehow think that having more numbers makes them better?

Isn't the game all about the fun, getting outdoors, and enjoying finding caches?

What would be the attraction to having the most numbers?

Is there a prize somewhere I am not aware of?

Is there a special event where the number ho folks congregate?

Please don't talk about the high-number finder in PA or wherever that always seems to stir people up so much--that just means that this thread won't last long.

3.8k · September 5, 2006

I'm a numbers ho,

The number I am striving for is 0. I want to have zero caches unfound in my 50 mile radius. Then my goal will be zero unfound in my state.

September 5, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'

How do you define that term?

I would prefer that the big number finders really NOT be the ones discussed here, but rather the smaller number finders who somehow think that having more numbers makes them better?

Isn't the game all about the fun, getting outdoors, and enjoying finding caches?

What would be the attraction to having the most numbers?

Is there a prize somewhere I am not aware of?

Is there a special event where the number ho folks congregate?

Please don't talk about the high-number finder in PA or wherever that always seems to stir people up so much--that just means that this thread won't last long.

I can give you a fine example of what I would call a “number ho”. In our little caching community we have a cacher gone bad. He was deleted by several cache owners for posting bogus cache finds just to reach the number one spot in his state. To make up for the lost numbers he started logging “attended” logs on one of his archived events and back dating several logs on his own archived caches just to make up the numbers. I think if you are so worried about your stats that you have to resort to logging your own caches and events that have been archived nearly a hundred times you are definitely a “number ho” I don’t care if your profile says its all about the fun and the friends, you are a number ho. For an example of what I’m talking about check out the cache GCM73T and other archived caches and event by the same cacher.

3.9k · September 5, 2006

Someone with more cache finds than you = Numbers Ho

Someone with less cache finds that you = Lazy

38.2k · September 5, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'
How do you define that term?

Somebody whose primary goal in this sport is to increase their find total and who will do anything that will add a smiley. This includes things like logging finds on caches they don't actually find and using cheesy methods like logging pocket caches, armchair virtuals, multiple finds on caches, dislocated caches and retirement cards to increase their "find" count.

Isn't the game all about the fun, getting outdoors, and enjoying finding caches?

For many of us it is. For others its all about getting that next smiley.

What would be the attraction to having the most numbers?

None whatsoever to me, but my guess is the admiration of a small subset of like minded individuals.

Is there a prize somewhere I am not aware of?

"Celebrity". You see it at some events when one of the "heavy hitters" arrive and people go out of their way to meet the person and get their photo taken with him (or her).

Is there a special event where the number ho folks congregate?

As I understand it, the chief point of the first Geowoodstock was for the top numbers cachers in the world to get together. I don't think there are events these days only for the big numbers folk, but there are events that celebrate individuals who reach certain milestones.

September 5, 2006

I'm a numbers ho,

The number I am striving for is 0. I want to have zero caches unfound in my 50 mile radius. Then my goal will be zero unfound in my state.

Note to self: place a few caches in Lawrence.

:blink:

10.1k · September 5, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'

How do you define that term?

I would prefer that the big number finders really NOT be the ones discussed here, but rather the smaller number finders who somehow think that having more numbers makes them better?

Isn't the game all about the fun, getting outdoors, and enjoying finding caches?

What would be the attraction to having the most numbers?

Is there a prize somewhere I am not aware of?

Is there a special event where the number ho folks congregate?

Please don't talk about the high-number finder in PA or wherever that always seems to stir people up so much--that just means that this thread won't last long.

Is that the official definition of 'numbers ho'? Dang. I must be doing something wrong. :blink: No, I do not feel that I am better than anyone else based on numbers. I like numbers! I only look down on people who deliberately hide terrible caches.

Yes. I have fun getting outdoors, matching wits with cache hiders, and enjoying nature, and the new places this game takes me. I went four for seven today. Actually, three for six against a noted local devious cache hider. That's a great mental challenge. And a great section of trail that I hadn't hiked before. (Of course, I do have to hike it again to find the rest of those caches...)

And, I enjoy the numbers! Hoping to hit a thousand soon.

So, either your definition is worng, or mine is.

September 5, 2006

Somebody whose primary goal in this sport is to increase their find total and who will do anything that will add a smiley. This includes things like logging finds on caches they don't actually find and using cheesy methods like logging pocket caches, armchair virtuals, multiple finds on caches, dislocated caches and retirement cards to increase their "find" count.

OH OH---I think I just found one of those.

Deleted logs are showing up several of his own archived caches on his own caches--and this is on his profile:

<snip> I live in rural _______ and I'm a cache-a-holic. Fortunately they've not came up with a 12 step program for it yet. I enjoy caching to rediscover the area I live in. I'm always amazed at what the area holds that I never knew was there. It's all about the fun and laughs. <snip>

Somebody who logs their own caches is definitely fitting the description you mention above...but I guess we could add that to the rest of your descriptors and maybe even add this to a wikipedia definition for a numbers ho!

:blink:

Is this the same cacher Bubbles has referred to above? huh? is it?

3.3k · September 5, 2006

Besides everything that Briansnat said, a numbers ho will pinch there nose and find every lame micro, even the kind they dislike, just so they can find "100 in a day." They even thank the finders for the find, even though it was for the smiley, and nothing else.

Lets not forget those cachers who replace the missing cache with a lame micro, just so they can get the "found it" smiley. They get mad when cache owners delete their finds, because they never found the real cache, that was never missing in the first place.

1.6k · September 5, 2006

I'm a numbers ho,

The number I am striving for is 0. I want to have zero caches unfound in my 50 mile radius. Then my goal will be zero unfound in my state.

I'm pushing 37 miles out right now. Don't know about the whole state thing though. STL and KC will be tough.

1.2k · September 5, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'

How do you define that term?

...

Ehhhh, nevah mind.

Edited September 5, 2006 by nicolo

September 5, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'

How do you define that term?

Somebody who finds one stage of a multi-stage cache and logs the whole things as a find.

If it's one of mine they get deleted real quick-like.

Or somebody who can't find a cache after three or four attempts, and with each DNF log they bitch about how inappropriate the cache is, or the area is dangerous. But dadgum, do they keep looking because they want to have that dadgum smilie! That's a Numbers Ho.

Now me? I'm a FTF Ho, and a GeoCoin Ho, and a TB Ho...

Ask me what a GeoCheater is! Oh, go ahead, please ask!

1.8k · September 5, 2006

Besides everything that Briansnat said, a numbers ho will pinch there nose and find every lame micro, even the kind they dislike, just so they can find "100 in a day." They even thank the finders for the find, even though it was for the smiley, and nothing else.

I don't think I'm a numbers ho.

Yet I found 100 in a day. It was a personal challenge, which required hiking many, many miles in 110-degree heat. I wound up with heat exhaustion and was sick for several days afterwards.

There were, of course, a few lame micros interspersed amongst them. Does that make me a numbers ho?

Does it matter if I had a blast that day with several good friends--even while I signed yet another lamppost log?

September 5, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'

How do you define that term?

But, who really cares? Some people are in it for the numbers. Some for the hard hunts. Some for the outdoors. Some because they like it.

Whatever floats your boat, hmmm? The reason doesn't really matter. I had a guy log onto one of my caches that he completed 101 caches that day. No way. That's one cache every 14 minutes for 24 straight hours. Not physically possible, unless it was temporary caches at an event cache that was dreamed up to strictly boost numbers. Do I care? No. Did I erase his log? Nope. If he wants to log 1000 caches/day, I don't care. Won't change the way I play at all.

September 5, 2006

Ask me what a GeoCheater is! Oh, go ahead, please ask!

Ok, I'll bite...

"What's a GeoCheater?"

2.2k · September 5, 2006

Ok, I'll bite...

"What's a GeoCheater?"

Let's try to keep this one on-topic. That question and answer will derail this one too quickly, best to save it for another thread.

Thanks.

1.8k · September 5, 2006

I had a guy log onto one of my caches that he completed 101 caches that day. No way. That's one cache every 14 minutes for 24 straight hours. Not physically possible, unless it was temporary caches at an event cache that was dreamed up to strictly boost numbers.

Just because it's not physically possible for YOU, doesn't mean it isn't physically possible.

September 5, 2006

Just because it's not physically possible for YOU, doesn't mean it isn't physically possible.

Please, <i>please</i>, show me how you can do one cache every 14 minutes for 24 consecutive hours. Driving time, the hunt, the find, the log, etc. Please. I'm very curious...

2.5k · September 5, 2006

Sure that's possible! We did 22 in about 5 hours a couple of weekends ago. We were with several other cachers, and in a small town with about 50 caches in it. We had never been there before and we had to drive or walk at least a few blocks between each cache. We weren't even hurrying. We kept hanging out at caches and talking and telling stories about caches we had seen or heard about.

And our "typical day" is 12 finds in about that amount of time. I really didn't keep track while we were caching, since my unit keeps them on the calendar for me when I hit "found and next cache". When I pulled it up to log them, I was surprised to find we had done so many.

3.3k · September 5, 2006

Besides everything that Briansnat said, a numbers ho will pinch there nose and find every lame micro, even the kind they dislike, just so they can find "100 in a day." They even thank the finders for the find, even though it was for the smiley, and nothing else.

I don't think I'm a numbers ho.

Yet I found 100 in a day. It was a personal challenge, which required hiking many, many miles in 110-degree heat. I wound up with heat exhaustion and was sick for several days afterwards.

There were, of course, a few lame micros interspersed amongst them. Does that make me a numbers ho?

Does it matter if I had a blast that day with several good friends--even while I signed yet another lamppost log?

Andy,

I wasn't referring to your "desert death march." I would love to be able to find that many caches, in 100 plus weather, in the Palm Springs Area. You and I found 54 on one day, and it was in varied terrain. I also had a blast, because of the good company I shared.

I'm referring to the "mechanical method" where every cache is planned, in a certain order, and any cache requiring a hike is quickly ommitted. You know the caching where cachers go from parking lot to parking lot, as well as a few back alley caches.

1.8k · September 5, 2006

Just because it's not physically possible for YOU, doesn't mean it isn't physically possible.

Please, <i>please</i>, show me how you can do one cache every 14 minutes for 24 consecutive hours. Driving time, the hunt, the find, the log, etc. Please. I'm very curious...

I actually did 130 caches in 16 hours, which is 8.125 caches per hour. Honestly, it's not something I care to do again. (Bear in mind, also, that it's far from some other triple-digit days that others have accomplished.) It's a fairly straightforward formula that depends a lot on your determination and your luck:

1. Find a very cache-dense area that you haven't visited before.

2. Lots of planning: reading cache pages, figuring out which ones will be quick to get to and easy to find; planning out a route from which you do not deviate.

3. Enlisting the advice of one or more local cachers is a big help.

4. Don't waste time if you can't find a cache.

5. Bring friends so you can keep each other motivated.

6. Get an early start and just keep going.

September 5, 2006

I am ranked 75th in the state of Illinois. Because I know that does that make me a numbers ho? No, does the fact that I care about my numbers make me a number ho? Possibly, it depends on who you ask.

September 5, 2006

I actually did 130 caches in 16 hours, which is 8.125 caches per hour. Honestly, it's not something I care to do again. (Bear in mind, also, that it's far from some other triple-digit days that others have accomplished.) It's a fairly straightforward formula that depends a lot on your determination and your luck:

1. Find a very cache-dense area that you haven't visited before.

2. Lots of planning: reading cache pages, figuring out which ones will be quick to get to and easy to find; planning out a route from which you do not deviate.

3. Enlisting the advice of one or more local cachers is a big help.

4. Don't waste time if you can't find a cache.

5. Bring friends so you can keep each other motivated.

6. Get an early start and just keep going.

I hear, I just don't know how much of it I buy. Of couse, it doesn't matter what I believe. No argument there. I just think finding one cache every 7.5 minutes for 16 hours is borderline physically impossible, unless your "friends" hit caches simultaneously and you all just enjoy the logging. Whatever. I still will play the game the way I alway play.

My record? 11 in one day. With three kids in tow, ages 2, 4, and 7. Pretty amazing for our group!

1.8k · September 5, 2006

Andy,

I wasn't referring to your "desert death march." I would love to be able to find that many caches, in 100 plus weather, in the Palm Springs Area. You and I found 54 on one day, and it was in varied terrain. I also had a blast, because of the good company I shared.

I'm referring to the "mechanical method" where every cache is planned, in a certain order, and any cache requiring a hike is quickly ommitted. You know the caching where cachers go from parking lot to parking lot, as well as a few back alley caches.

Understood, and I'm glad you got your answer right. The point I was getting at is that it's difficult to discern one's motivation for finding caches based solely on the type/number of caches they've found. I have no doubt that there are people who truly enjoy spending a day running from parking lot to parking lot. I find the planning aspect ("look at all these caches for me to find!") oddly interesting, and I find it interesting to see how my planning abilities pan out.

If we didn't know each other and hadn't cached together, you could probably claim that I was a numbers ho based on my find count and my occasional enjoyment of power-caching (when my knee is acting up--which is far too often--I too omit caches requiring more than a short, level walk). If I didn't have to hold down some form of gainful employment, it's no doubt my find count would be much higher.

I can only speak toward my own motivation for caching the way I do, and I couldn't presume as to why other cachers--including those with four- or five-digit find counts--would want to find the number of caches that they do. Geocaching, in my humble opinion, is an awfully expensive and time-consuming means of simply making oneself feel important.

(Falsely boosting your find count, of course, is an entirely different story.)

1.8k · September 5, 2006

I hear, I just don't know how much of it I buy. Of couse, it doesn't matter what I believe. No argument there. I just think finding one cache every 7.5 minutes for 16 hours is borderline physically impossible, unless your "friends" hit caches simultaneously and you all just enjoy the logging. Whatever. I still will play the game the way I alway play.

My record? 11 in one day. With three kids in tow, ages 2, 4, and 7. Pretty amazing for our group!

If you ever find your way to So Cal, I can show you how possible (I won't say "easy" because it isn't!) it is. That's a serious offer.

Oh yeah, I forgot one piece of advice: leaving the kids at home helps boost the find count (though certainly not the nagged-by-the spouse count!).

September 5, 2006

If you ever find your way to So Cal, I can show you how possible (I won't say "easy" because it isn't!) it is. That's a serious offer.

Oh yeah, I forgot one piece of advice: leaving the kids at home helps boost the find count (though certainly not the nagged-by-the spouse count!).

I may take you up on it. In the meantime, Happy Caching!

1.8k · September 5, 2006

I may take you up on it. In the meantime, Happy Caching!

Awesome--drop me a note if you're interested. Meeting new cachers and showing them around is worth a lot more than any smiley!

September 5, 2006

My initial definition of "numbers whore" (and no, I don't soften the second word) applied to people who are so hungry for numbers that they returned caches in worst condition than when they found it.

Lots of people are in this game for the numbers, just like many of us are in it for the experience. Does this make the latter an "experience whore"? Doubtfully. It is when the acquisition of numbers hurts others that, in my book, it becomes numbers "whoredom". Examples include:

Finding a cache, logging it, and then just tossing it back anywhere.

Finding a cache, logging it, then returning it without replacing its camouflage/cover.

Finding a cache, logging it, then leaving it exposed.

Finding a cache, logging it, then putting it in an area/place where its obvious it will get discovered.

And, I'll add (due to the amount of maintenance time incurred on the cache owner to verify logs):

Consistantly logging online a "found" cache that was never truly found.

How to fight these individuals? I make it plain and simple: if you don't care about my caches, I don't care about your numbers. If I can narrow down which individual merely tossed the cache back in the general area, I revoke their find. I have a very low tolerance for individuals which not only waste my time and money, but, more importantly, waste the time of cachers who are negatively impacted by missing, misplaced, or out-of-place caches. I'm not trigger happy with this feature... but when it comes to the numbers whore, history repeats. When it does, then the trigger gets squeezed.

September 5, 2006

I hear, I just don't know how much of it I buy. Of couse, it doesn't matter what I believe. No argument there. I just think finding one cache every 7.5 minutes for 16 hours is borderline physically impossible, unless your "friends" hit caches simultaneously and you all just enjoy the logging. Whatever. I still will play the game the way I alway play.

My record? 11 in one day. With three kids in tow, ages 2, 4, and 7. Pretty amazing for our group!

Actually, on the other side of Illinois, there's a series called BoB which is pretty much made for doing in one intense day. It's got 99 "caches" in the series. They're all micros, and while they seem like just the kind of caches that people argue about, that's not for this thread. But yeah, knowing the northern 'burbs of Chicago well, I could see getting the 99 BoBs plus several others in one day reasonably easily.

September 5, 2006

This is such a great thread...everyone has their own version of what a #s ho is. I guess I need to rethink what I call a #s ho...I usually use it as a playful way to tease someone.

I guess I can be called a #s ho by some (most) because of my number of finds in the relatively short time I've been caching. I'm usually a quick finder, but I enjoy and remember a very high percentage of the caches I've found. The only thing I've ever done that could be considered questionable was this: I actually posted a found log on a cache where I found only a velcro fastener. A friend of mine and I saw that the cache had been virtually ignored for months by the owner even with several DNFs. This friend of mine and I posted the log just to get the hider's attention and boy did it ever! The find was deleted without a word (as well as without cache maintenance)from the owner, and I received hate mail from other cachers (not even the owner of the cache)! I had good intention when I logged the cache, but I felt like a total eedjit for doing it after I thought about it. The owner's response (or lack thereof) didn't exactly lend itself to an apology from me so I dropped it. I was happy to have the log deleted even if I didn't get to do it myself. Lesson learned.

I've read most of the posts on the thread and one thing is true. The ability of folks to find large numbers in one day depends on the density of the area. Team Perks hit the nail on the head...come to cache-dense SoCal and most of us can show you a VERY LARGE numbers day. Does that make us hos? Perhaps to some... In a two-week stretch in July I boosted my numbers by almost 400 caches. Now I'm still averaging about 50 caches a week and I'm not doing what I'd call power caching.

I used to really love going out after big numbers, caching all day and into the wee hours of the morning. But my work schedule as changed as has my circle of caching friends, and now I can just "settle" for 20-25 caches an outing. Yesterday I went out for a couple of hours and only found 6 caches, but I had one of the best days of caching ever because of the circumstances and the company.

There are people in my area who have problems with ethics and priorities, but I don't like to call them #s hos; remember, I use that as a playful term. These folks steal caches (entire containers including contents and TBs!), preach ethics when they themselves are unethical and are just generally disliked by the rest of the harmonious caching population.

We all play the game differently but that's what makes the game great...we can all get something different out of it and hopefully have fun doing it! I'll still use the label #s ho as a way to poke fun at folks I consider friends and not the folks who consistently exhibit bad cacher behavior! I have plenty of other things I like to call them... Cache on!!

1.8k · September 5, 2006

I've read most of the posts on the thread and one thing is true. The ability of folks to find large numbers in one day depends on the density of the area. Team Perks hit the nail on the head...come to cache-dense SoCal and most of us can show you a VERY LARGE numbers day.

To illustrate this point, you have more than 1500 finds and yet the only time I can specifically remember seeing your name was when you logged one of my caches last month.

September 5, 2006

Yes...I think I may have a picture of my Subaru at that cache...GREAT view! I also did your cache at the LaBrea Tar Pits a while ago...did that one while on a day of virtuals! I'll send you the pic if I can find it.

Sorry...back to the topic...

September 5, 2006

I hear, I just don't know how much of it I buy. Of couse, it doesn't matter what I believe. No argument there. I just think finding one cache every 7.5 minutes for 16 hours is borderline physically impossible, unless your "friends" hit caches simultaneously and you all just enjoy the logging. Whatever. I still will play the game the way I alway play.

My record? 11 in one day. With three kids in tow, ages 2, 4, and 7. Pretty amazing for our group!

Actually, on the other side of Illinois, there's a series called BoB which is pretty much made for doing in one intense day. It's got 99 "caches" in the series. They're all micros, and while they seem like just the kind of caches that people argue about, that's not for this thread. But yeah, knowing the northern 'burbs of Chicago well, I could see getting the 99 BoBs plus several others in one day reasonably easily.

Yep, did the BoB thing while visiting the daughter at Great Lakes Naval. Scored 32 in 2 hours, then headed off for some coffee, bored to tears. Did meet some interesting folks, and being from Florida and visiting Chicago for the first time, the caches took us to some neat neighborhoods. I cached, the dear Mrs. gawked at neat neighborhoods from the passenger seat. Works for me.

To the OP: Numbers Hos, IMO, are those who run down every shoddy cache, and look down their nose at you because of your oh so obvious inferiority. I have made some good decisions and bad ones in my handling of them, but that's just me.

As you hang out more here, and cache in your local community, you will develop friendships, and that, along with the great hikes and talks with other folks makes all the cuts and bruises worthwhile. In this sport, "do as you will, but harm none" is definitely the rule. Cache on!

2.1k · September 6, 2006

It is when the acquisition of numbers hurts others that, in my book, it becomes numbers "whoredom". Examples include:

Finding a cache, logging it, and then just tossing it back anywhere.

Finding a cache, logging it, then returning it without replacing its camouflage/cover.

Finding a cache, logging it, then leaving it exposed.

Finding a cache, logging it, then putting it in an area/place where its obvious it will get discovered.

...but when it comes to the numbers whore, history repeats. When it does, then the trigger gets squeezed.

I have always thought these things were done by people less committed to the game and usually with lower find counts.

With 80+ container cache hides I recall that these things have been happening with more frequency with the higher number of new people visiting our area.

I know of a cacher that was dedicated to the game but because he couldn't see well he liked to rehide containers in a more exposed manner so they would be easier for others to find.

During a 70 cache find trip to the SF South Bay I found several containers more exposed than necessary and it was not, at all, apparent that it was done by "numbers ho's".

I don't believe that because someone once saw a 5k finder be sloppy about rehiding once or twice that that translates into ALL who like to find a lot of caches are doing these things.

I suspect that if you visited all your caches after each and every find to see who was being sloppy I think you would find no specific pattern that relates to number of finds. (Would love to see the results of your search though.)

2.3k · September 6, 2006

When we first started it was partly about the numbers but after hitting number 100 it did not seem to matter so much, now I find myself going and finding 5 caches in a 8 hour period but each cache rocks rather than 35 micros (not that I dislike micos).

1.9k · September 6, 2006

A numbers ho will log tempoary caches by logging the event itself. They might have 15 events on their records page, but actually only been to 3. But hey, they are winning!

Didn't this practice get eliminated when they disallowed pocket caches?

September 6, 2006

I actually did 130 caches in 16 hours, which is 8.125 caches per hour. Honestly, it's not something I care to do again. (Bear in mind, also, that it's far from some other triple-digit days that others have accomplished.) It's a fairly straightforward formula that depends a lot on your determination and your luck:

1. Find a very cache-dense area that you haven't visited before.

2. Lots of planning: reading cache pages, figuring out which ones will be quick to get to and easy to find; planning out a route from which you do not deviate.

3. Enlisting the advice of one or more local cachers is a big help.

4. Don't waste time if you can't find a cache.

5. Bring friends so you can keep each other motivated.

6. Get an early start and just keep going.

I hear, I just don't know how much of it I buy. Of couse, it doesn't matter what I believe. No argument there. I just think finding one cache every 7.5 minutes for 16 hours is borderline physically impossible, unless your "friends" hit caches simultaneously and you all just enjoy the logging. Whatever. I still will play the game the way I alway play.

My record? 11 in one day. With three kids in tow, ages 2, 4, and 7. Pretty amazing for our group!

11 in one day with 3 kids is a great run.

But more proof that it can be done. I did it solo :tired:

67 Caches in 13 hrs 10 min

67 caches found in 13 hrs 10 min.

64.4 miles total distance traveled

12.1 miles of hiking not counting any distance from car to cache for park and grabs.

That is 1 cache found every 11.6 min

Had I not set a 24 hour time limit from start to finish. I could have kept caching for another 5 or 6 hours and found 33 more! :laughing: Right?

Edited September 6, 2006 by Roland_oso

3.3k · September 6, 2006

I hear, I just don't know how much of it I buy. Of couse, it doesn't matter what I believe. No argument there. I just think finding one cache every 7.5 minutes for 16 hours is borderline physically impossible, unless your "friends" hit caches simultaneously and you all just enjoy the logging. Whatever. I still will play the game the way I alway play.

My record? 11 in one day. With three kids in tow, ages 2, 4, and 7. Pretty amazing for our group!

Start at geocache GCWRKG and zoom out on the geocaching map. This is where Team Perks did their desert death march. You'll see that the "power trails" have caches every .1 miles, for miles. Most cachers can walk 528 feet in a couple of minutes or two, combine that with a minute or two to find the cache, repeat this 100 times, and that is how it can be done.

6.5k · September 6, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'
How do you define that term?

Hi, my name is wimseyguy and I am a numbers 'ho, sometimes.

I like finding caches, I like it a lot.

Sometimes I like to go out with my geopals and find lots of caches.

Sometimes we go on road trips and cache for 12+ hours a day for 2-5 days in a row and find 60-110 caches/day.

Sometime we spend all day just to find one 5/5 that hasn't been found in months.

Sometimes I go out solo and hike for several hours to find 1-2 caches.

Sometimes I look along a route and see how many are very close to it and plan to find them all either going to or coming from my destination.

Sometimes I just walk away from a hunt because it isn't fun, and maybe the next one will be.

On Thursday I will probably even skip out on a corporate golf outing and cache my way back home.

I hope this has helped clarify the definition you are seeking.

(smilies omitted on purpose, and in honor of flask)

PS it's also important to me that my find count>my post count.

Edited September 6, 2006 by wimseyguy

September 6, 2006

It is when the acquisition of numbers hurts others that, in my book, it becomes numbers "whoredom". Examples include:

Finding a cache, logging it, and then just tossing it back anywhere.

Finding a cache, logging it, then returning it without replacing its camouflage/cover.

Finding a cache, logging it, then leaving it exposed.

Finding a cache, logging it, then putting it in an area/place where its obvious it will get discovered.

...but when it comes to the numbers whore, history repeats. When it does, then the trigger gets squeezed.

I have always thought these things were done by people less committed to the game and usually with lower find counts.

[...]

I suspect that if you visited all your caches after each and every find to see who was being sloppy I think you would find no specific pattern that relates to number of finds. (Would love to see the results of your search though.)

Actually, these observations were made nearly three years ago. Perhaps the face of the game has changed appearance slightly, or perhaps it's a case of regional variance.

My cache maintenance was, frankly, quite anal back then... to the point I sometimes would make maintenance runs after only one or two people had visited. It was during these visits I was able to come to the conclusion I did.

Some of today's heralded "top cachers" (at least, as demonstrated by numbers) have, on multiple occasions, left my caches exposed, usually by my own witnessing, but also by the word of others in the caching community who I trust and who visited my caches and reported discrepancies.

The observations made were very definitive, to the point I can name specific names. I won't. They know who they are, and their continued activities mean, elsewhere, others also know who they are.

Which reminds me: I forgot to add one thing to the "numbers whore" list. Add the individual who attends a caching event in which it is clearly marked only one event "logging" can be made, yet holds up the event and/or detracts from everyone's fun by arguing with the cache owner they should be able to log multiple times. Seems the group of individuals who repeatedly pull this stunt overlaps greatly with the group I mentioned earlier.

38.2k · September 6, 2006

I think there are two different kinds of numbers folk that we're talking about here.

To me a "numbers ho" is what I defined in post #5 in this thread. A numbers ho pursues smileys without regard to honesty,or propriety. Someone who will basically sell his soul to increment his find count.

Then there is a "numbers fiend". A numbers fiend only logs legit finds, but is almost singularly focused on getting that next find. Any cache is a good cache to the numbers fiend and any time and place can be turned into an opportunity to search for a cache or two, or twenty.

2.1k · September 6, 2006

I think there are two different kinds of numbers folk that we're talking about here.

To me a "numbers ho" is what I defined in post #5 in this thread. A numbers ho pursues smileys without regard to honesty,or propriety. Someone who will basically sell his soul to increment his find count.

Then there is a "numbers fiend". A numbers fiend only logs legit finds, but is almost singularly focused on getting that next find. Any cache is a good cache to the numbers fiend and any time and place can be turned into an opportunity to search for a cache or two, or twenty.

This is pretty funny. You have (appropriately) broadened the heading to Numbers Folk and thank you for that. I'm sure there are some people who fit these two seriously over-generalized descriptions but your categories are far too limited in scope.

The real world actually has a third and much more populated category for people who like to find a lot of caches in a short period of time. People in this group cache EXACTLY the same way 90% of all cachers cache. They hunt down caches, sign log books, replace caches responsibly and enjoy the places they are taken as well as the other benefits of this game. They just do more of it than most others. Other than the amount of caches they have found they are NOT singularly different than any other cachers with the exception that they might be a little more careful than the larger number of people trying out the game but who are not really committed to it.

September 6, 2006

I cache a lot.

You cache too much.

She is a numbers ho.

2.1k · September 6, 2006

Some of today's heralded "top cachers" (at least, as demonstrated by numbers) have, on multiple occasions, left my caches exposed, usually by my own witnessing, but also by the word of others in the caching community who I trust and who visited my caches and reported discrepancies.

But does your research show that people with high find counts do this with any greater frequency than all the people who don't count as "numbers hos"?

High profile cachers catch our attention far more so than the masses of regular cachers, newbies, short timers not committed to the sport, generally sloppy cachers, attitude cachers and people who are unaware that their actions are having a negative effect on the game.

Per 100 caches found I think most people produce about the same amount of sloppyness. Per 100 caches found I think that most people do about that same amount of good deeds.

I think that the image of the high finder, numbers ho, numbers fiend, or what ever you choose to call it is a myth.

September 7, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.' How do you define that term?

I define it by example - primarily by looking in the mirror. Of course, I couldn't give a flying fig about anyone else's numbers, except for some admitted jealousy of the folks who clearly have more time to spend playing with their GPSr than I do. And even then, the jealousy is entirely good-natured.

All I care about is my numbers, and watching them grow.

I would prefer that the big number finders really NOT be the ones discussed here, but rather the smaller number finders who somehow think that having more numbers makes them better?

There are lots of messages here railing about the "more numbers makes me better" geocachers, but from what I can see those people are actually very rare. No doubt there are some out there, but they're a tiny minority. Certainly they're not worth the amount of discussion and angst they seem to engender!

Isn't the game all about the fun, getting outdoors, and enjoying finding caches?

Sure. All that, and more. There being no hard and fast rules, each person plays according to their own preferences. Some folks are concerned with getting their numbers up. If it's not affecting me, I don't see what it matters. Is it affecting you? If so, how? If not, why worry about it?

September 7, 2006

And our "typical day" is 12 finds in about that amount of time.

Grumblegrumblegrumble.

I consider myself jamming if I get three in a day!

September 7, 2006

I am ranked 75th in the state of Illinois. Because I know that does that make me a numbers ho? No, does the fact that I care about my numbers make me a number ho? Possibly, it depends on who you ask.

Where can I find the rankings you're using for Illinois? I want to see how far down on it I fall having a whopping 35 finds :unsure:

September 7, 2006

Actually, these observations were made nearly three years ago. Perhaps the face of the game has changed appearance slightly

Well, it's certainly gotten prettier now that I'm here! :unsure:

September 7, 2006

I am ranked 75th in the state of Illinois. Because I know that does that make me a numbers ho? No, does the fact that I care about my numbers make me a number ho? Possibly, it depends on who you ask.

Where can I find the rankings you're using for Illinois? I want to see how far down on it I fall having a whopping 35 finds

I haven't searched the system to know for sure yet, but your area must be rich with caches (or should be). Once upon a time, I lived in Romeoville. The last time I passed through that area, there was still some undeveloped areas and just spots that (now I recognize) would be great hiding places.

- HauntHunters

7.9k · September 7, 2006

I keep hearing and reading about cachers who are called a 'numbers ho.'
How do you define that term?

Somebody whose primary goal in this sport is to increase their find total and who will do anything that will add a smiley. This includes things like logging finds on caches they don't actually find and using cheesy methods like logging pocket caches, armchair virtuals, multiple finds on caches, dislocated caches and retirement cards to increase their "find" count.

Isn't the game all about the fun, getting outdoors, and enjoying finding caches?

For many of us it is. For others its all about getting that next smiley.

What would be the attraction to having the most numbers?

None whatsoever to me, but my guess is the admiration of a small subset of like minded individuals.

Is there a prize somewhere I am not aware of?

"Celebrity". You see it at some events when one of the "heavy hitters" arrive and people go out of their way to meet the person and get their photo taken with him (or her).

Is there a special event where the number ho folks congregate?

As I understand it, the chief point of the first Geowoodstock was for the top numbers cachers in the world to get together. I don't think there are events these days only for the big numbers folk, but there are events that celebrate individuals who reach certain milestones.

Spot on and exactly right!

When the number becomes more important than the fun you are having, YOU BE A HO!

How Do You Define a Numbers Ho?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment