"Old school" caching: Cure for burnout?

[+TrailGators]

A rating addition would work.......Difficulty, Terrain, Appealing.

An appealing of 1 would be the parking lot lightpole , a 5 would be a mountside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties. .

Set your filters and youre good to go.

That would only work if everyone enjoyed the same things.

So why don't the microspew lovers find a microspew cache for their big milestones?

Edited November 20, 2006 by TrailGators

[+sbell111]

That's why I said "For now, ignoring all urban caches is the best way to do this." The problem is that some really good lower terrain caches will get ignored using this method. So to me that method is like cutting with a dull knife.

Whether you miss any good ones by filtering is only important if you have found all of those that were filtered in. Edited November 20, 2006 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

A rating addition would work.......Difficulty, Terrain, Appealing.

An appealing of 1 would be the parking lot lightpole , a 5 would be a mountside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties. .

Set your filters and youre good to go.

That would only work if everyone enjoyed the same things.

So why don't the microspew lovers find a microspew cache for their big milestones?

I can't come up with criteria that everyone would consider 'good', can you?

 

Not only can I not say how others determine which cache to find as a milestone, I don't even know what a milestone is. Is it every 1000 caches? Every 100? Every 50?

 

I can tell you that I have never planned to hit a specific cache as a specific find. I just take them as they come.

Edited November 20, 2006 by sbell111

[+drat19]

A rating addition would work.......Difficulty, Terrain, Appealing.

An appealing of 1 would be the parking lot lightpole , a 5 would be a mountside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties. .

Set your filters and youre good to go.

That would only work if everyone enjoyed the same things.

Gotta agree with sbell on that one. The mountainside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties might be a "1" to some people, since it would probably require a 2 hour hike and would only result in 1 smiley.

[+TrailGators]

A rating addition would work.......Difficulty, Terrain, Appealing.

An appealing of 1 would be the parking lot lightpole , a 5 would be a mountside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties. .

Set your filters and youre good to go.

That would only work if everyone enjoyed the same things.

So why don't the microspew lovers find a microspew cache for their big milestones?

I can't come up with criteria that everyone would consider 'good', can you?Not only can I not say how others determine which cache to find as a milestone, I don't even know what a milestone is. Is it every 1000 caches? Every 100? Every 50?I can tell you that I have never planned to hit a specific cache as a specific find. I just take them as they come.

 

I think "most" people would consider finding their 1000th cache find a very special occasion. So caches that people would consider doing for their 1000th find could serve as a litmus test for defining "good."

[+sbell111]

Gotta agree with sbell on that one. The mountainside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties might be a "1" to some people, since it would probably require a 2 hour hike and would only result in 1 smiley.

By mentioning the number of smilies you attempt to emotionally charge the issue to force people to your side of the argument. While it is certainly true that a two hour hike for many cachers is a deal breaker. Also, approximately half of all cachers would not be interested in viewing the bathing beauties. In fact, their presence may turn more cachers away who do not wish for the cache to be muggled by same. Therefore, many cachers would rate this hypothetical cache very low on the happy scale.

[+TrailGators]

A rating addition would work.......Difficulty, Terrain, Appealing.

An appealing of 1 would be the parking lot lightpole , a 5 would be a mountside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties. .

Set your filters and youre good to go.

That would only work if everyone enjoyed the same things.

Gotta agree with sbell on that one. The mountainside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties might be a "1" to some people, since it would probably require a 2 hour hike and would only result in 1 smiley.

Where is that cache?

[+sbell111]

I think "most" people would consider finding their 1000th cache find a very special occasion. So caches that people would consider doing for their 1000th find could serve as a litmus test for defining "good."

I don't know what to tell you. On the day I found my 1000th cache, I found 19 caches. I couldn't hope to tell you which one was lucky number 1000. I'm sure it was 'good'.

Edited November 20, 2006 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

I just realized that I found my 1000th cache three years ago today!

[+TrailGators]

I think "most" people would consider finding their 1000th cache find a very special occasion. So caches that people would consider doing for their 1000th find could serve as a litmus test for defining "good."

I don't know what to tell you. On the day I found my 1000 cache, I found 19 caches. I couldn't hope to tell you which one was lucky number 1000. I'm sure it was 'good'.

I did say "most" people!

[+fatboy52]

Urban caches and micros have thier place.i have found some great micros.my only worry is when people might put out less scenic caches and less ammo cans in the woods types,in other words it will be up to the hiders to help keep ''old school'' caches.

[+tozainamboku]

I think "most" people would consider finding their 1000th cache find a very special occasion. So caches that people would consider doing for their 1000th find could serve as a litmus test for defining "good."

I don't know what to tell you. On the day I found my 1000 cache, I found 19 caches. I couldn't hope to tell you which one was lucky number 1000. I'm sure it was 'good'.

I did say "most" people!

I know a lot of people who choose an event cache for their milestone. Are you saying that it's more challenging to find the pizza joint than a micro in the lamp post?

In reality very few people are exclusively urban cachers or exclusively hikers. So if you usually do urban hides, picking a challenging hike for a milestone, especially if you do it with a group of friends, may make sense. You're going to do fewer hikes so you might as well save them up for a special occasion.

I still see plenty of people who get their milestones during a day of urban power caching. My actual 1000th find was during a day of urban power caching with Ventura_Kids. Of course the next weekend I went out on a nice hike and celibrated my 1000th find. Unfortunately it rained that day and the group that was going to go with me all backed out, so I did the hike on my own.

[+drat19]

Gotta agree with sbell on that one. The mountainside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties might be a "1" to some people, since it would probably require a 2 hour hike and would only result in 1 smiley.

By mentioning the number of smilies you attempt to emotionally charge the issue to force people to your side of the argument. While it is certainly true that a two hour hike for many cachers is a deal breaker. Also, approximately half of all cachers would not be interested in viewing the bathing beauties. In fact, their presence may turn more cachers away who do not wish for the cache to be muggled by same. Therefore, many cachers would rate this hypothetical cache very low on the happy scale.

Well, I wasn't attempting to emotionally charge anything nor engage in any argument, since I know it's an unwinnable argument around here (i.e., plenty of players on both sides of the issue, we know this)...I was just making an observation in the context of the discussion. But looking at it from the "outside", OK, I can see where one could have seen my post there that way. Fair enough. (You do have way too much fun parsing my (and others') words, don'tcha? )

[+drat19]

I think "most" people would consider finding their 1000th cache find a very special occasion. So caches that people would consider doing for their 1000th find could serve as a litmus test for defining "good."

I don't know what to tell you. On the day I found my 1000 cache, I found 19 caches. I couldn't hope to tell you which one was lucky number 1000. I'm sure it was 'good'.

I did say "most" people!

Irony: My #1000 was during my 3-day assault on Nashville (sbell's home turf!) on a pure Numbers Run back in Dec '03, in the throes of my Numbers Ho days. I'm not sure exactly which was the actual #1000, but it was probably a Dalmatian. Go figure.

 

On a related note, tying back to my OP: I bagged those first 1000 caches between my start in 6/02 and that trip in 12/03...18 months. In the almost 3 years (35 months) since then, I've only bagged around 800 more...and only around 200 or so of them in the past 24 months.

Edited November 20, 2006 by drat19

[+TrailGators]

The mountainside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties might be a "1" to some people, since it would probably require a 2 hour hike and would only result in 1 smiley.

Where is that cache?

So are you going to tell me where this cache is or not!

[+StarBrand]

I need the scenic out-of-the-way ones to revive my enthusiasum once in a while but mostly I cache in rural areas so I can avoid the burnout type cache.

[+Lemon Fresh Dog]

There are a great variety of cachers and cache types. Personally, I like regular-sized, urban traditionals that I can hunt with my children in tow. I also like hiking, but do not choose destinations based upon caches - I select where I want to go and if the time, availability and inclination exist - I'll cache.

 

I also really like to visit a cache in each new place I visit - it has to be a regular though - because I enjoy moving and creating Travel Bugs.

 

however.....it's not about me.

 

The game should be for a wide-audience and I think the real key is a better explaination of the different types of caches and what they involve. It would be great to have a "new cacher" one-sheet that listed all the various cache types and what they involved. - something iconic and easy to read.

 

Then.... there's the numbers. While I am not sure a rating system is ever going to work, it would be great to have a "cache-type" stat page. I'm absolutely not a numbers person. It would be interesting to see the "mix" that some of the high-number folks have. If micros, regulars, etc were broken out from the main category of "traditional" - it would give a clearer idea of what is really being found.

 

Meanwhile. Maps are your friends. If you see a cache on the top of a summit in the middle of nowhere - I suspect a hike and regular container may be there (do the research). If you see 45 caches in a cement downtown core.....sounds like micros to me.

 

You have to fish where the fish you want are swimming.

[+TrailGators]

I think "most" people would consider finding their 1000th cache find a very special occasion. So caches that people would consider doing for their 1000th find could serve as a litmus test for defining "good."

I don't know what to tell you. On the day I found my 1000 cache, I found 19 caches. I couldn't hope to tell you which one was lucky number 1000. I'm sure it was 'good'.

I did say "most" people!

Irony: My #1000 was during my 3-day assault on Nashville (sbell's home turf!) on a pure Numbers Run back in Dec '03, in the throes of my Numbers Ho days. I'm not sure exactly which was the actual #1000, but it was probably a Dalmatian. Go figure.

On a related note, tying back to my OP: I bagged those first 1000 caches between my start in 6/02 and that trip in 12/03...18 months. In the almost 3 years (35 months) since then, I've only bagged around 800 more...and only around 200 or so of them in the past 24 months.

It is clear that anyone solely in it for numbers cares little or nothing about the quality of caches they find. However, I still disagree it is not possible to create a list of caches that "most" people would really enjoy finding. I'm sure everyone has their favorites if you asked them.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

The mountainside waterfall adorned with bathing beauties might be a "1" to some people, since it would probably require a 2 hour hike and would only result in 1 smiley.

Where is that cache?

So are you going to tell me where this cache is or not!

 

That fall is a place in Mississippi called Waterfall Three in Clark Creek.....I'm a 60 yr old guy with tri-focals who walked 4 hours to get there and my glasses were sweaty.......heck I don't think it was bathing beauties at all, it was Drat and BlueCanary.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Not only can I not say how others determine which cache to find as a milestone, I don't even know what a milestone is. Is it every 1000 caches? Every 100? Every 50?

 

I can tell you that I have never planned to hit a specific cache as a specific find. I just take them as they come.

 

Ditto:

 

When I went for 1000, I ended up at 1006. Since I wasn't sure what order I found them in by the time I loged them...I'm not sure which was my 1000th find. Toss in a questionable find or two in my dark past and 1002 may be the real 1000. It's murky. That said some people do want to cap their milestone on certain caches. Sometimes it's a cache placed by someone they think is important even if the cache is micro spew.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

In regard to milestones, I remember #1, #100, #1000, and #2000.......it was not intentional I just do. My goal almost from day one was #2000.....we found a micro in a ballpark for #2000 which was fine with me as we have done so many regulars and micro's around ballparks. I planned none of the above milestones but #2001 was a lamp base and my wife and I both agreed had it been #2000 we would have got a different one.....that's just us but after 3 1/2 years of a lot of $ and sweat I just felt that way.

Aside from the above we remember , and often talk about, many great caches and the locations they took us to.

 

The most fun caching is when you're far away from your home city........everything is new and a challange.

[+TrailGators]

...Not only can I not say how others determine which cache to find as a milestone, I don't even know what a milestone is. Is it every 1000 caches? Every 100? Every 50?

 

I can tell you that I have never planned to hit a specific cache as a specific find. I just take them as they come.

 

Ditto:

 

When I went for 1000, I ended up at 1006. Since I wasn't sure what order I found them in by the time I loged them...I'm not sure which was my 1000th find. Toss in a questionable find or two in my dark past and 1002 may be the real 1000. It's murky. That said some people do want to cap their milestone on certain caches. Sometimes it's a cache placed by someone they think is important even if the cache is micro spew.

 

I guess I am in the minority with this small group. It took me three years to reach 1000 almost a year ago. A group joined me to do one of the oldest caches in San Diego. I had a lot of fun doing it and will always remember it. But nowadays caching is like shooting fish in a barrel and people are hitting 1000 finds in six months or less. Of course that doesn't take away anything away from my experience, but perhaps hitting 1000 is no longer considered a big deal....

[+BAMBOOZLE]

...Not only can I not say how others determine which cache to find as a milestone, I don't even know what a milestone is. Is it every 1000 caches? Every 100? Every 50?

 

I can tell you that I have never planned to hit a specific cache as a specific find. I just take them as they come.

 

Ditto:

 

When I went for 1000, I ended up at 1006. Since I wasn't sure what order I found them in by the time I loged them...I'm not sure which was my 1000th find. Toss in a questionable find or two in my dark past and 1002 may be the real 1000. It's murky. That said some people do want to cap their milestone on certain caches. Sometimes it's a cache placed by someone they think is important even if the cache is micro spew.

 

I guess I am in the minority with this small group. It took me three years to reach 1000 almost a year ago. A group joined me to do one of the oldest caches in San Diego. I had a lot of fun doing it and will always remember it. But nowadays caching is like shooting fish in a barrel and people are hitting 1000 finds in six months or less. Of course that doesn't take away anything away from my experience, but perhaps hitting 1000 is no longer considered a big deal....

 

It's no question it's not the challange in work, time, and money that it once was.....ask Drat.......in the deep south you almost had to take a plane to get to the next cache " back then".

[Neos2]

I honestly think that I would be bored, bored, bored if every cache were "just" a trek into the woods to hunt for an ammo can hidden in a tree trunk or under a suspicious looking pile of branches. There is a time that I want that, and then there are times when I want something else. I'm sure that sentiment is shared by others---hence the fact that there are other types of caches out there to hunt.

 

I don't share your view that there is such a thing as "microspew"--and I live in a fairly dense caching area. We have micros, we have smalls, we have ammo cans and so forth. We have puzzles and multis and yes, we have the trite ammo can in the woods. That's exactly how I like things to be.

 

I don't know why you say folks don't hunt micros for their milestone caches.

Here is my list of milestones:

 

100th cache Rose Bowl Falls

200th cache Drove It Into the Ground

300th cache Family Tree

400th cache Dark Shadows II

500th cache Mid City Mall

600th cache Lick Creek Fortification

 

They are a variety of containers and hunts here, but none of them ammo cans. I choose my significant finds for the story behind them, or the company that will be with me that day, or just out of curiousity:

Rose Bowl Falls --Army D-Con container, site now archived by DNR--grueling hike

Drove It Into the Ground --virtual car nose down in the ground w/manniken that changes attire on a regular basis

Family Tree --micro in a gigantic Cherry Bark (largest in Indiana)

Dark Shadows II --rubbermaid locking-style container in historic cemetery

Mid City Mall --notoriously hard-to-find micro

Lick Creek Fortification --micro in a woods that used to be owned by some of my family (largest old growth forest in Indiana)

 

I actually meant for my 600th to be another cool virtual, but we decided to stop at Lick Creek first that day, which suited me, as I love that place and it does have that family connection for me anyway.

 

I know from talking to other cachers that I'm not the only one who chooses caches based on the interest factor, rather than the hike rating.

[+drat19]

That fall is a place in Mississippi called Waterfall Three in Clark Creek.....I'm a 60 yr old guy with tri-focals who walked 4 hours to get there and my glasses were sweaty.......heck I don't think it was bathing beauties at all, it was Drat and BlueCanary.

If you hallucinated me and BC as "bathing beauties" at WF3 (to readers outside of our region: one of the truly GREAT caches you'll find anywhere...4.5 terrain stars of pure satisfaction...seriously), then we need to have a LONG talk about those funny brownies you've been eatin'...

[+gof1]

I have two stories that relate to this topic.

Neither one of them will change anyones mind, but they sort of show my viewpoint.

 

I'll preface by saying that I have been caching for just over a year.

With my wife we have found something just over 500 caches, I used to have that number memorized.

 

In August we took our first Geocaching vacation. That is to say that a large part of what we planned was caching oriented. It was one week of camping ending with a large event cache. We wanted to get our numbers up so that the event would be number 500. On one day we drove about fifty miles to do a day of numbers caching in a nearby city. After about two hours or so we decided that we weren't having any fun. We went back to camp and spent the next couple of days hiking our butts of finding every cache in the woods we could get to. We made our "milestone" but should have spent more time enjoying all those lovely places that people had led us to. When we first started we would have found every cache in that city.

 

The second story just happened over the last few days. We received a cache log for the first cache that we had hidden. The log mentioned some broken glass in the area. We disabled the cache until we could go check it out. This past Saturday we drove over and had a look around. We talked about how we wouldn't hide one like that today. That was when we decided to archive the cache. It just didn't feel like us anymore.

 

I think we have grown as cachers in the past year. The caches that we enjoy are different. The ones we hide are different. The numbers just don't seem as important as they did when we started. We still do micros, when they happen to be were we are, we just make our planned caches a bit more of a challenge. We look for new and interesting places that we never knew we could find in our own back yard.

 

I know several cachers that will take a weekend and find every drive-up cache in a city. They like their numbers. More power to them, and I know they are having fun.

 

There are all types of cachers. Good thing there are all types of caches.

 

As I look this post over I see that I have made it longer than I intended. The more I typed the more I thought, the more I thought the more I typed. Sorry to be so long winded.

[+drat19]

It's no question it's not the challange in work, time, and money that it once was.....ask Drat.......in the deep south you almost had to take a plane to get to the next cache " back then".

True! I used to drive to Bam's neck of the woods in New Orleans (90 miles from Biloxi) because I had cleared out everything else within that radius of my home coords. How times have changed...

[+TrailGators]

I don't share your view that there is such a thing as "microspew"

The Emperor is wearing a robe!

 

I don't know why you say folks don't hunt micros for their milestone caches.

Who said that? Anyhow, let's just forget the 1000th find scenario since it seems to have little meaning for most and so my original point was lost.....

[+BAMBOOZLE]

That fall is a place in Mississippi called Waterfall Three in Clark Creek.....I'm a 60 yr old guy with tri-focals who walked 4 hours to get there and my glasses were sweaty.......heck I don't think it was bathing beauties at all, it was Drat and BlueCanary.

If you hallucinated me and BC as "bathing beauties" at WF3 (to readers outside of our region: one of the truly GREAT caches you'll find anywhere...4.5 terrain stars of pure satisfaction...seriously), then we need to have a LONG talk about those funny brownies you've been eatin'...

 

I had to use your link and go read a few logs....almost brought tears to my eyes. I've done lots of things but after walking/climbing for 8 hours I was wiped out.......we stopped at Baton Rouge to eat on the way home and I had to pull my self up the stairs using the handrail because my legs were shot ( and I ran every day)

 

To the folks reading this thread, check Drats link......it would be worth a trip down from anywhere to do this cache.....you would remember it if you forgot all your milestones.

[+TrailGators]

I think we have grown as cachers in the past year. The caches that we enjoy are different. The ones we hide are different. The numbers just don't seem as important as they did when we started. We still do micros, when they happen to be were we are, we just make our planned caches a bit more of a challenge. We look for new and interesting places that we never knew we could find in our own back yard.

It's actually more fun without the numbers!

[+drat19]

I had to use your link and go read a few logs....almost brought tears to my eyes.

I did the same thing when I dug up that link!

[+TrailGators]

Ironically this is one of the best micros I have ever found!

 

[+BAMBOOZLE]

The topic was burnout.

 

Geocaching is all about being OUTDOORS ( I've found a few indoors....you can't beat those Magellans Platinums ) You get in you car, clear the mechanism, and you're off for an adventure. All that other stuff isn't that important. Like fishing, you go after the fish you want , using the tackle and bait you choose. Some catch more than others.....some fish for perch and some tarpon but all are happy....they are OUTDOORS relaxing yet getting exercise. Some want 60 perch while others bag 1 tarpon.

The GC website etc. is fine...it gets the job done....I like it.

 

The problem is some ( like me ) set a # goal and at some point it starts to become more like work. I like #'s for many reasons but I'm glad my quest is over....it feels like a load is off but it didn't have to be that way....I guess some of us have more compulsive natures.

[+TrailGators]

it feels like a load is off but it didn't have to be that way....I guess some of us have more compulsive natures.

This is very true!

[+sbell111]

... The problem is some ( like me ) set a # goal and at some point it starts to become more like work. I like #'s for many reasons but I'm glad my quest is over....it feels like a load is off but it didn't have to be that way....I guess some of us have more compulsive natures.

This describes me to a 'T'. I cached hard for the first couple of years. I went after all caches and frequently drived two or three hours so I could have a fresh territory to hit. Since then, I've averaged about a hundred caches per year. I still like to go on cache runs some days, but it's no longer as high on the priority list that it used to be.

[+Lighteye]

The topic was burnout.

I addressed this in my post last week, but I didn't use the word burnout. That is EXACTLY what we are fighting now.

The problem is some ( like me ) set a # goal and at some point it starts to become more like work.

 

You win the prize today with that one.It completely and utterly sums it up for us. 2 simple sentences took care of it all. Well done.

 

Our problem is now this: I have recently been diagnosed with a nagging case of osteo arthritis in both hips, which is seriously impeding on our ability to hike longer distances. I can numb it out for a few hours with a prescription, which I did 2 weeks ago, but it takes the fun out of it a bit knowing that I have to be back at the trailhead within 5-6 hours.

 

We had the most perfect weather this weekend and because I couldn't hit the trail, I parked it at home with a heating pad, planning our next hike with Quakemap. Planning it is half the fun these days. If the humidity will stabilize, we have a neat hide laid out, but it will require 5-6 miles of hoofing it through the scrub. We're just hoping that we can pull it off.

 

Great topic, and thanks to all for summing it up.

[+TrailGators]

I guess there is more than one kind of burnout. My burnout isn't from trying to achieve some number. My burnout is from finding too many blah caches and losing my enthusiam.

Edited November 21, 2006 by TrailGators

[+drat19]

I guess there is more than one kind of burnout. My burnout isn't from trying to achieve some number. My burnout is from finding too many blah caches and losing my enthusiam.

Yep, mine too...although in my case it was an offshoot of being focused on my numbers "back in the day".

 

Interestingly, reading how this thread has progressed/digressed, I notice I (and some other respondents) regain some of that old enthusaism reminiscing about some old/great cache hunts. That's what I hope to reclaim one of these days...the point of my OP.

Edited November 21, 2006 by drat19

[+budd-rdc]

My response about the 1000th find...

 

I don't think it matters how fast one gets to 1000 finds, it still is a major achievement, and seems to mark a turning point from irrational exuberance to cynicism. I chose an old cache in a foreign country for my 1000th, and made it into an adventure by taking an overnight train on a cheap ticket, then starting a 3 hour hike at dawn to get there. After that, I started to pick caches based on its own criteria rather than basing on the number of finds, especially after thinking about my find count for a while and realizing that depending on who defines what, I wasn't really sure if it was a 1000th find. (I had unlogged finds, as well as duplicate finds on LCs, CITO event, and a cache I found twice for a TB rescue - two containers, two log books, but same waypoint)

 

For me, the cure for burnout is adventure. For most people, going on a hike, discovering unique and interesting locations are all part of that. I'm sure there are people who find navigating in urban areas adventurous, so I won't diss them.

[+TrailGators]

For me, the cure for burnout is adventure. For most people, going on a hike, discovering unique and interesting locations are all part of that.

I agree. But how does one efficiently filter out the non-adventurous caches that cause burn-out? Let's not rule out any urbans or micros if they are located in unique and interesting locations. Also before anyone answers, please do not give an answer like "what is interesting to one cacher may not be interesting to another." Instead offer your views what you actually believe are unique and interesting locations. Then it would be awesome to find out how we can run a PQ for these....

[+budd-rdc]

But how does one efficiently filter out the non-adventurous caches that cause burn-out? Let's not rule out any urbans or micros if they are located in unique and interesting locations. Also before anyone answers, please do not give an answer like "what is interesting to one cacher may not be interesting to another." Instead offer your views what you actually believe are unique and interesting locations. Then it would be awesome to find out how we can run a PQ for these....

For me, it's simple. I try not to worry about what I missed. Only filter I use for PQ is for puzzles, because the cache is likely not at the posted coordinates. That's unfortunate, because "on location puzzles" are some of the caches I enjoy most. I don't worry about it, ignorance is bliss. I just try to make most of what I have. I can always make up for it by running a PQ with just puzzles, and try solving them on a rainy day.

 

Also, you can make a decision on-the-fly. Lemon Fresh Dog said it best above:

Meanwhile. Maps are your friends. If you see a cache on the top of a summit in the middle of nowhere - I suspect a hike and regular container may be there (do the research). If you see 45 caches in a cement downtown core.....sounds like micros to me.

 

People have proposed various sophisticated filtering methods, but I'm the opposite, I rely on simplicity and experience. A quick reading of the title and description of the cache page also helps in making snap decisions on whether to look for parking, or just keep driving.

[+TrailGators]

But how does one efficiently filter out the non-adventurous caches that cause burn-out? Let's not rule out any urbans or micros if they are located in unique and interesting locations. Also before anyone answers, please do not give an answer like "what is interesting to one cacher may not be interesting to another." Instead offer your views what you actually believe are unique and interesting locations. Then it would be awesome to find out how we can run a PQ for these....

For me, it's simple. I try not to worry about what I missed. Only filter I use for PQ is for puzzles, because the cache is likely not at the posted coordinates. That's unfortunate, because "on location puzzles" are some of the caches I enjoy most. I don't worry about it, ignorance is bliss. I just try to make most of what I have. I can always make up for it by running a PQ with just puzzles, and try solving them on a rainy day.

 

Also, you can make a decision on-the-fly. Lemon Fresh Dog said it best above:

Meanwhile. Maps are your friends. If you see a cache on the top of a summit in the middle of nowhere - I suspect a hike and regular container may be there (do the research). If you see 45 caches in a cement downtown core.....sounds like micros to me.

 

People have proposed various sophisticated filtering methods, but I'm the opposite, I rely on simplicity and experience. A quick reading of the title and description of the cache page also helps in making snap decisions on whether to look for parking, or just keep driving.

 

 

What if you had a list of caches like the one in my signature link?

[+budd-rdc]

What if you had a list of caches like the one in my signature link?

That would work, and it's simple, because someone else did the filtering for me.

[+TrailGators]

What if you had a list of caches like the one in my signature link?

That would work, and it's simple, because someone else did the filtering for me.

Now all you have to do is drive 10 hours to get to the closest one cause I don't have one for the Bay area! It would be nice if TPTB would give each cacher a recommended cache list to create. Then they could compile everyone's lists to create one massive list for the whole world! That would cure my burnout!

[+sbell111]

What if you had a list of caches like the one in my signature link?

This is not really the thread for it, but I think that your list is a perfect example of why 'favorites' lists don't work. I took a look at the first dozen or so cache pages and determined that I would not like about half of them. I suspect that I'm not alone.

[CoyoteRed]

What if you had a list of caches like the one in my signature link?

This is not really the thread for it, but I think that your list is a perfect example of why 'favorites' lists don't work. I took a look at the first dozen or so cache pages and determined that I would not like about half of them. I suspect that I'm not alone.

 

I don't think anyone said a favorite has a 100% certainty to please everyone. A favorite is one that is more likely to please more people.

 

Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't make it invalid for others.

[+sbell111]

I don't think anyone said a favorite has a 100% certainty to please everyone. A favorite is one that is more likely to please more people.

 

Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't make it invalid for others.

Sure, but just picking randomly works for many. Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't make it invalid for others.

[+TrailGators]

I don't think anyone said a favorite has a 100% certainty to please everyone. A favorite is one that is more likely to please more people.

 

Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't make it invalid for others.

Sure, but just picking randomly works for many. Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't make it invalid for others.

Are you being argumentative again sbell? A favorites list is is not a guarantee. Just because a lot of people have really enjoyed doing these caches doesn't mean that everyone will. Have you ever heard of a "Bell" curve? You will only get average caches by doing random selection. I am talking about finding the upper end of the distribution. Also the fact that there is not a single lamp post cache on this list proves that the list does not include the bottom end of the distribution.

[+Walts Hunting]

Well I agree about caching in the woods as I start my day South of Yosemite and head out. At home I will give micros close to me a quick try and unless there is something creative (judging from the logs) they go on my ignore list. I find that this way gets me to interesting micros but the lame ones don't take up to much time. Although I do have to consider myself lucky in that there are 500 caches within 18 miles of my home so I can afford to discriminate. Numbers are unimportant to me.

[+tozainamboku]

A consolidated recommend list like TrailGators or Markwell's proposal to do it on Geocaching.com is just what is says it is. Its a list of caches that have been recommended by some number of geocachers. Will such a list miss some great caches - sure, especially new caches or difficult caches that very few people do. Will it have caches that everyone would like - of course not, not everyone likes the same caches. Will it help TrailGators avoid burnout - maybe, if there are enough people who like the kinds of caches he likes then some caches he would like would be recommended. There will probably also be recommendations for caches he would prefer not doing. But he has fewer caches where he has to read the pages to decide if he wants to do it. The list just serves as another filter, like avoiding all micros.

 

TrailGators problem seems to be that he is afraid that he will miss some great caches if he has to resort to a broad filter like no micros. I have the same fear when I go into a Baskin-Robbins. I may miss some ice cream flavor that I would really like. I stick to chocolate and vanilla because some of the flavors may be really lame and never try any other flavors. What geocaching needs is not a cache rating system or a recommended caches list. What geocaching need is those little free sample scoops, so you can taste a cache before commiting to find it.