Find:Hide Ratios

[+krisandmel]

Hey everyone, what a nice January day here in southern Minnesota!

 

Set out to find 4 today, found them all and chalked up a overall grand total of 30 finds since we started this great game/recreation/sport/diversion last June.

 

Thirty isn't many compared to just about everyone here it seems, but we're proud of it, and look forward to finding and hiding many more in the future.

 

Which brings me to the point: We've decided, at least for the time being, to try to have a 10:1 ratio of finds to hides.

 

Figuring that we don't just want to spew trash around the land, this ratio helps to pace us and ensure that we learn from each one that we find and place new caches that are entertaining, or clever, or somehow worth the effort, even if a 1/1, we don't just want to do the same old thing.

 

Plus, it gives me an additional little goal to shoot for, with each ten found, our/my prize is "getting to" hide another one.

Haven't put out #3 just yet, but have already had a lot of fun planning it and working on camo and such.

 

As we continue caching, maybe our ratio will change one way or another, and I'm not saying anyone else should have any set ratio; play your own game.

 

I'm just curious if other people have set a ratio for themselves, or what makes you decide "hey, I'm gonna hide another one soon"!

Do you waypoint in your GPSr places you think would be good, and come back later to hide something?

Or, get a whole cache together at home and then head out to find somewhere to hide it?

 

Anyway, what fun!

 

Still haven't bumped into any other cachers afield, maybe that's why I'm bugging y'all here!

~K

[+briansnat]

I have no set ratio. When I first started geocaching my find:hide ratio was usually around 1:1, but once I started getting more finds under my belt it became 2:1, then 3:1 and now its roughly 4:1.

 

As I get more finds there is no way I could keep up my orginal pace and in a few years I doubt 4:1 would be manageable.

 

Do you waypoint in your GPSr places you think would be good, and come back later to hide something? Or, get a whole cache together at home and then head out to find somewhere to hide it?

 

I usually discover a spot while out hiking and come back with a container. Sometimes I'll read about a place in a newspaper or magazine and check it out to see if its a good spot for a cache.

 

When I have a container and go looking for a place to hide it, I find my hide isn't usually that good because I tend to "force" the cache into a spot that fits. So I'm better off finding a good spot, then selecting the appropriate container.

Edited January 10, 2007 by briansnat

[+Harry Dolphin]

I'm at a 50 to 1 ratio. Thanks, but I couldn't and wouldnt want to maintain more than that. Hmmm... Almost time to hide another evil mystery cache! Hee hee hee.

[+nekom]

My ratio right now is 37 finds, 2 hides, but that's just how it happened. I think the emphasis I have is on placing caches people would want to find, and improving the quality with each one, regardless of how many finds I get between now and the next one. My first cache I think was above average, my second better still, and the one I have in mind for my 3rd will be even better yet.

[+krisandmel]

When I have a container and go looking for a place to hide it, I find my hide isn't usually that good because I tend to "force" the cache into a spot that fits. So I'm better off finding a good spot, then selecting the appropriate container.

 

Good point! Our first hiding spot was somewhat limited by the container we brought with us.

Ended up not being the greatest spot, got muggled and wet, so went back with a better container after a few weeks and relocated the cache to a more secure hide.

 

Our second cache was only placed a couple days ago and with that one we had to turn down a couple cool hiding spots due to the container size.

But, having learned from the first one, we took some time and searched the area pretty well until finding a spot that would accomodate the container well.

Time will tell if we picked a good spot or not.

 

I'm at a 50 to 1 ratio. Thanks, but I couldn't and wouldnt want to maintain more than that. Hmmm... Almost time to hide another evil mystery cache! Hee hee hee.

 

Yes, that's another consideration, I just don't have the time to adequately maintain dozens or, gulp, hundreds of caches.

 

That reminds me.....

I should probably go check on Hide #1 soon, it's been a month or two since I've been onsite, and although the logs look good, I do like to visit periodically and read the additional things people write down in pencil but don't necessarily type into the website log.

 

I think the emphasis I have is on placing caches people would want to find, and improving the quality with each one, regardless of how many finds I get between now and the next one.

My first cache I think was above average, my second better still, and the one I have in mind for my 3rd will be even better yet.

 

That's exactly what I'm talking about!

 

~K

Edited January 10, 2007 by krisandmel

[+Woodlit]

I don't have a ratio set for myself.

 

But for your other question. Never set up a container and set out looking for a spot. There is a good chance you won't find a perfect spot, so you will end up "rushing it" and having a poorly placed cache. Some people argue that you should keep one on hand ready to go just in case you find the perfect spot, but I don't agree with that either. The spot maybe perfect, but your pre-made container won't be. I usually try to paint my container the same color as the surroundings, or match the camo as best as I can. The chances of you having a container to match the surrounds is bad. But, there are two sides to every argument, so do whatever you please.

I set out hunting for locations first. I have been out dozens of times looking for places to hide a cache, and never did. But when I do find one, I try to remember as much about the area as possible. I then go home and work on the container. Should it be a pipe? decon? ammo can? ok, I remember the trees being a dark color, but the rocks are real small, maybe I should glue some on? Thats just some of the stuff I think about. I just think it is best to know the area before you place, this way you can tailer the cache to be a perfect fit. But thats just the way I see it.

I'm sure everybody has their own way of doing it. Find one that works for you.

[+krisandmel]

Woodlit, great points, especially about the matching camo.

 

I saw a great spot the other day, but the only two containers I have at home are already painted in colors that wouldn't make it camoflage at all for the spot I found.

(Think dark swampy colors versus red pine needles.)

 

So, I grabbed a bit of the debris from the area and will use it to match paint for the container.

 

Interesting hearing all the responses, keep 'em coming!

~K

Edited January 11, 2007 by krisandmel

[+Woodlit]

Good idea taking the surrounds home with you. Now depending on what you took home, instead of matching colors, you can attach your goods right to your container. Like if you grabbed a bag of pine needles. Spread a thin film of clear epoxy all over your container, and spread the pine needles all over Almost like putting sprinkles on a donut.

 

Edit: lol don't glue your container shut though

Edited January 11, 2007 by Woodlit

[Via Con Ardillos]

im at a 112 to 2 or 56 to 1 whichever you perfer. however i just got some new containers for xmas. so i should be able to boost my hides. YAAAY

[+TrailGators]

im at a 112 to 2 or 56 to 1 whichever you perfer. however i just got some new containers for xmas. so i should be able to boost my hides. YAAAY

I'm about 60:1 now, but there are so many caches out here now that there is no need for anyone to feel obligated to hide them. I was actually thinking more along the lines of upgrading some of the caches that I already own. I have learned quite a bit about how to make a better cache over the years.

[+Lovey Pigs]

52 to 9 to this point. I have enjoyed looking for a 'good' location' vs. just a dash/grab, etc... As I have been driving around my area I now have my 'cache' eyes on, looking for a good location, and will come back check it out, etc... So no set ratio, just seeing how the 'cache' moves me.

[+Super_Nate]

For me, I don't really care about ratios! I love stats in Geocaching, but hide/find ratios is one stat that I simply do not care about. Do the math....I have found 1,045 and hid 52! I don't look for places to hide a cache, I let the places come to me. When I am out caching or doing errends, I might see a place that is worthy of a cache hide. I don't turn the car around and stick a film canister out there right away, I like to come up with neat ideas for the hide and then revisit and hide it.

 

So....kudos for those who do the find:hide ratios because the hides is what boosts our stats, but I'm just not going to fool with it.

[+Ambrosia]

I have over 1050 finds, and 32 active hides. Ack! I would want to use a 10:1 ratio.

 

Over time I started carrying a few different cache sizes with me, because I very often would see a place to hide one and it's great to be able to put it right there before anyone else does. But this tends to take over your life a bit, so I don't recomend it for everyone.

 

Looking over my cache hides, I see that I've done all sorts of things. I've hidden caches when I see a good spot, I've adopted a cache, I put in caches where someone else archived one because it was a good spot to still have a cache, I've placed caches in spots that went with something historical about that spot, I placed one in the nearest park to where I was born, I placed a series because I was slightly obsessed with how searching for caches on gc.com happens, I placed a cache for an incubator cache requirement, and one to show the history of the apple industry in my town.

Edited January 11, 2007 by Ambrosia

[+scrubjay1986]

I am more about am I going to be able to maintain the hide than placing the hide. Right now my ratio is 150:0.

[+krisandmel]

I was actually thinking more along the lines of upgrading some of the caches that I already own. I have learned quite a bit about how to make a better cache over the years.

 

Another great point.

 

Our first cache container was a cheap replica of tupperware.

The plastic was brittle and never was quite watertight.

After only two months in a relatively protected area the lid and bowl were cracked.

 

So, I replaced the container with a camo-painted .30 cal ammo can; like upgrading from a Daewoo to a HMMWV!

 

~K

[+scrubjay1986]

I was actually thinking more along the lines of upgrading some of the caches that I already own. I have learned quite a bit about how to make a better cache over the years.

 

Another great point.

 

Our first cache container was a cheap replica of tupperware.

The plastic was brittle and never was quite watertight.

After only two months in a relatively protected area the lid and bowl were cracked.

 

So, I replaced the container with a camo-painted .30 cal ammo can; like upgrading from a Daewoo to a HMMWV!

 

~K

 

That seems to be the best type of container.

[+krisandmel]

So, I replaced the container with a camo-painted .30 cal ammo can; like upgrading from a Daewoo to a HMMWV!

 

~K

 

That seems to be the best type of container.

 

Yes, although they're getting spendier than they used to be.

Still worth it though, considering they'll still be around with the cockroaches after we're all gone.

 

I also like the Lock 'n' Lock's, especially the smaller ones, where ammo cans wouldn't fit.

 

~K

[+Renegade Knight]

....I'm just curious if other people have set a ratio for themselves, or what makes you decide "hey, I'm gonna hide another one soon"!

Do you waypoint in your GPSr places you think would be good, and come back later to hide something?

Or, get a whole cache together at home and then head out to find somewhere to hide it?...

 

When my cache placing muse speaks I listen. That's about the only set rule. My muse varies in the type and style of cache. A couple are completed and on a shelf waiting for the perfect patch of ground. Sometimes it's "this spot on the topo looks cool, I'll go check it out and place a cache". Sometimes it's just to make fun of a forum debate over what a lame cache is. Sometimes I heard someone mention a spot they thought I might find interesting.

[Aushiker]

G'day

 

I am currently running around sort of 5:1. I say sort of because I count my archived caches in my count of placements.

 

I am pretty lucky here as we still have plenty of bush and areas to place caches so can easily maintain that ratio at present. Plus I am probably more interested in trackables and hiding caches than I am in finding them.

 

Regards

Andrew

Edited January 11, 2007 by Aushiker

[+Gator Man]

I tried real hard to maintain a 10% ratio for a very long time. I was good until about a year ago, when I seemed to go on a finding spree for several months. I'm trying to catch back up, (currently at 8.6%, 141/1638) but need 23 more hides without a find to get back to 10%.

 

It becomes a burden. If you go out and find 40 or 50, you can't help thinking in the back of your mind, "Now I need to add 4 or 5 more to my hide list! But if everyone is out "FINDING" and not many are "HIDING", pretty soon we'd all need a new hobby.

 

GM

[+Gator Man]

...

Edited January 11, 2007 by Gator Man

[+Kit Fox]

I have 972 finds, and 90 hides. I'll hide more caches when I find spots that meet my criteria:

 

Lead by Example, Hide Great Caches in Great Locations.

 

A "few" pages of extra reading for you.

 

Finds To Hides Ratio

Find / Hide Ratio

Hides to finds ratio

Find / Hide Ratio

 

The whole list

[+NickRac]

I don't have any ratio in mind, but I started a couple days ago - I have 12 finds now but have been working hard the past 2 days on building a few caches to deploy - I'll be deploying roughly 4 over the next week.

[+gof1]

I am not a fan of find to hide ratios.

This thread has brought to mind a local cacher, who will remain nameless, who works to maintain a 10 to 1 ratio. When he first started he had some nice hides. As time went on it got to the point that he has been hiding caches just to keep up with his ratio. The quality of his hides has suffered.

Try to hide a few caches that people will love to find and will remember, not a large number of caches that will be found and forgotten.

[Aushiker]

I am not a fan of find to hide ratios....

Try to hide a few caches that people will love to find and will remember, not a large number of caches that will be found and forgotten.

 

Seems to me you are assuming find to hide ratios equate to bad placements which need not be the case. I like to maintain my ratio but I also like to put some effort into my hides and will continue to take that approach for the foreseeable future. Now maybe I will have to drop off the number I hide because areas start getting saturated but I suspect that will be some time given my locality.

 

Now without starting a flame war, I also choose to not place micros anymore and have archived mine and replaced them with boxes, so again taking that approach may well of course cut back the number of reasonable caches I can place in the future.

 

I guess time will tell.

 

Andrew

[+Loch Cache]

I applaud anyone who places a good hide and curse anyone who places a crappy hide just for the sake of hiding one. I also think that someone who places no caches or less has than a 100:1 ratio of finds to hides is nothing more than a parasite who should give back to the sport that they take from. (Unless of course there are handicaps that prevent them from doing so.) At 100:1 there are very few cachers that would have to have more than 50 caches out there.

 

OK, I am off the soapbox now. I like to hide caches and run at about 10:1 depending on my mood. I am a little behind right now at 485:44 but I have a few in the works and won’t rush one out just for a ratio. I like to place a variety of caches ranging from the beloved to the cursed. I have tried hard to keep all my caches running although some are harder to do than others. I have archived 2 and have 2 TU right now. I think when placing a cache you have to look at the maintenance aspect of it too.

 

I think a lot of people place simple traditionals because they want to place hides that are easy to maintain and then want to find better caches. Like the guy who comes over to watch the game and brings a six pack of Bud but drinks your (insert name of favorite micro brew here) instead. Or the guy who complains about the park and grab micros invading his turf and still goes out and finds them.

 

That’s my $.02

 

Loch Cache

[Backup]

Go to Rankings for Geocachers scroll down and start clicking on "Current stats" and you can see who's a full Geocaching participant and who is just a user. If you don't hide 'em, I can't find 'em.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Go to Rankings for Geocachers scroll down and start clicking on "Current stats" and you can see who's a full Geocaching participant and who is just a user. If you don't hide 'em, I can't find 'em.

 

Like all geocaching stats, those don't mean a thing.

 

I'm ranked 612 with 2055 finds and 39 hides... in fact ~200 of those are Pocket Caches (Multiple Event logs) and only 17 of my hides are active - the rest of them are archived caches or events.

 

Beside that I didn't log caches for a long time, or just logged some, so there are hundreds of finds that I did not log online.

 

Nor do those stats indicate the 50 or so fully-stocked ammo boxes and dozen or so micros I have given away at events, to be hidden by the winners... not my hides but I was responsible for them being hidden!

 

Stats will never be a way to evaluate geocachers.

Edited January 11, 2007 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+BeavTeam]

I may be opening a can of worms here or putting my foot in my mouth, but here goes.

 

I have had many conversations with other cachers while searching for a newbies cache. Not always, but frequently, we found that new cachers, anxious to put out a cache will do a 'poor' job. Coordinates can be flaky, containers are less than durable, and locations are easily muggled. We have thought that maybe if they had a few hundred cache finds under their belt and had more experience, these types of things could be avoided. Experience using a GPS and discovering what type of hides work/ dont work is invaluable and is only acquired with experience. At least that is what we thught...

 

How many times have you come upon a cache and wondered just how long it would last?

 

To me, it is more important to put out quality, sustainable hides, than just to put out numbers.

 

Let the barbs begin.

 

MightyBeav

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I may be opening a can of worms here or putting my foot in my mouth, but here goes.

 

I have had many conversations with other cachers while searching for a newbies cache. Not always, but frequently, we found that new cachers, anxious to put out a cache will do a 'poor' job. Coordinates can be flaky, containers are less than durable, and locations are easily muggled. We have thought that maybe if they had a few hundred cache finds under their belt and had more experience, these types of things could be avoided. Experience using a GPS and discovering what type of hides work/ dont work is invaluable and is only acquired with experience. At least that is what we thught...

 

How many times have you come upon a cache and wondered just how long it would last?

 

To me, it is more important to put out quality, sustainable hides, than just to put out numbers.

 

Let the barbs begin.

 

MightyBeav

 

This has been discussed over and over, and after years of caching and thousands of finds I still disagree!

 

Newbies often bring creativity and refreshing change.

 

My favorite local cache is a multi that was the first effort of a newbie - it's still one of the most highly recomended in the area after two years in place!

 

I would hate to have newbies learn "the way it's done" and try to duplicate that!

[+krisandmel]

I have 972 finds, and 90 hides. I'll hide more caches when I find spots that meet my criteria:

 

Lead by Example, Hide Great Caches in Great Locations.

 

A "few" pages of extra reading for you.

 

Finds To Hides Ratio

Find / Hide Ratio

Hides to finds ratio

Find / Hide Ratio

 

The whole list

 

Thanks for those links!

 

Great to read all the differing viewpoints in this thread.

 

Interesting that I've been thinking that 10:1 will help me avoid spewing worthless caches into the woods.

But as many have pointed out, if I really went nuts and went on a finding spree and got to the hundreds or a thousand finds, that would mean 50-100 hides that I would be responsible for maintaining.

 

So, in that case, I'm pretty sure this 10:1 thing will only last up to a hundred finds or so.

~K

[+fox-and-the-hound]

We're at about 14 to 1 right now, but we have a half dozen being prepared right now. We tried to place about one a month to see how many we could handle. We quickly learned that multis take a lot more maintenance in our area so that was a learning curve. So currently we have gotten comfortable handling four 5-to-6 stage multis, a couple regular and a couple micros. We're working on adding 3 more big multis and a couple regulars over the winter. So even after a year we're still adjusting. Alabama Rambler is right about newbies and caches. Most of the best seem to always come from people who really care rather than people who have a lot of caches under their belt.

[+Team Perks]

I'm currently at exactly 38 to 1. I don't try to keep to any ratio; I hide at my own pace, when I feel I've found areas worthy of hiding a cache.

 

After 3600 finds, a lofty goal like a 10:1 ratio becomes entirely unmanageable.

[+scrubjay1986]

I applaud anyone who places a good hide and curse anyone who places a crappy hide just for the sake of hiding one. I also think that someone who places no caches or less has than a 100:1 ratio of finds to hides is nothing more than a parasite who should give back to the sport that they take from. (Unless of course there are handicaps that prevent them from doing so.) At 100:1 there are very few cachers that would have to have more than 50 caches out there.

 

OK, I am off the soapbox now. I like to hide caches and run at about 10:1 depending on my mood. I am a little behind right now at 485:44 but I have a few in the works and won’t rush one out just for a ratio. I like to place a variety of caches ranging from the beloved to the cursed. I have tried hard to keep all my caches running although some are harder to do than others. I have archived 2 and have 2 TU right now. I think when placing a cache you have to look at the maintenance aspect of it too.

 

I think a lot of people place simple traditionals because they want to place hides that are easy to maintain and then want to find better caches. Like the guy who comes over to watch the game and brings a six pack of Bud but drinks your (insert name of favorite micro brew here) instead. Or the guy who complains about the park and grab micros invading his turf and still goes out and finds them.

 

That’s my $.02

 

Loch Cache

 

I am about being able to maintainee a cache long term and right now I am in a posistion on where I spend my time split between two places where I spend more than a month away from each place.

[+Harry Dolphin]

How many times have you come upon a cache and wondered just how long it would last?

 

To me, it is more important to put out quality, sustainable hides, than just to put out numbers.

 

Let the barbs begin.

 

MightyBeav

 

I did that one last weekend!!!! The Gladware container hidden on the slope between the apartment building and the parkway. I'm surprised that it's lasted three months! He's got a 5/1 found/hide ratio. Yup. Five finds and one hide. And, yes, I did go looking for it. And he has more finds on it than most of mine. Oh, well.

[+krisandmel]

I can't believe people use gladware.

 

If I can't step on it without breaking it, I don't think it's very suitable as a container.

 

Sure, there are exceptions of course; but it's pretty hard to accidentally damage an ammo can.

 

Lots of plastic containers either get brittle due to the ever changing temps, or they get UV rot, or both.

I've said before that I like the Lock 'n' Locks, and they are vulnerable to that as well, but with proper camo you shouldn't have much exposed bare plastic anyway.

That's another thing, I don't like seeing completely plain containers of any type out in the woods.

Even if an ammo can or LnL can be completely concealed in a hollow of a downed tree it is a shame to see it without any paint or camo or geocaching-labelling.

Clear tupperware/rubbermaids with colorful tops, or all-clear LnL's, c'mon.

The worst are the ammo cans that are as-issued, complete with yellow ordnance markings - why not just save a step and call the bomb squad yourself. Someone is bound to eventually. Sheesh!

 

In addition to a nice location or clever hiding spot or something, I like to see a little thought put into the container.

Sorry to sound rantish, just making an observation.

 

~K

[+gof1]

I am not a fan of find to hide ratios....

Try to hide a few caches that people will love to find and will remember, not a large number of caches that will be found and forgotten.

 

Seems to me you are assuming find to hide ratios equate to bad placements which need not be the case. I like to maintain my ratio but I also like to put some effort into my hides and will continue to take that approach for the foreseeable future. Now maybe I will have to drop off the number I hide because areas start getting saturated but I suspect that will be some time given my locality.

 

Now without starting a flame war, I also choose to not place micros anymore and have archived mine and replaced them with boxes, so again taking that approach may well of course cut back the number of reasonable caches I can place in the future.

 

I guess time will tell.

 

Andrew

 

If you can place nice hides and keep them maitained that is great. Go ahead and place them at a 1:1 ratio if you want. I won't complain. I just hate to see them dropped just to keep up some self imposed ratio rule. And I have seen it more than once.

You seem to enjoy trying to keep your ratio up, but it looks like you don't want to let the quality of your caches suffer in the attempt. Good for you. Just wish I could afford to come down and check out the quality for myself, just to be sure.

[+nutlady]

When I started hiding, I will admit to some poorly placed unpopular caches. One by one they are getting "lost"....I just wish they would get lost FASTER! Part of me wants to go and yank them all out and archive them. But then I decided as others so I have read....that I should replace them with a better thought out cache. I have at any given moment at least 20 ready to go caches in my vehicle. I tend to make a cache and then look for a spot. Probably not the wisest method, and has been brought up. Better to find location first....but you cant teach an old dog new tricks! Besides, I carry with me at all times loads of "tools for the trade. "

 

The biggest thing I try to do now, is to NOT hide a cache "just because". Sure, I can go out tommorow and hide 50 lame hides, but I dont want that reputation. ( its already bad enough...LOL)

So my ratio is going way down, cause I prefer to hide caches that are more clever ( I HOPE) then what I started doing ! Personally, I would rather search for one clever thought out cache then 10 boring ones!

[Aushiker]

You seem to enjoy trying to keep your ratio up, but it looks like you don't want to let the quality of your caches suffer in the attempt. Good for you. Just wish I could afford to come down and check out the quality for myself, just to be sure.

 

I doubt I have the best caches or the cleverest caches. I do tend to place caches in areas I would like to visit (e.g., for views or someother feature), or in areas of historical interest or ones which encourage walking (my other hobby) or some exploring (e.g., walking up a river). So far I seem to get logs which suggest people enjoy the caches so hopefully doing okay. I also don't place hard to find caches as normally I have another reason for the cache location so would rather people enjoy that aspect. Mind you I have one cache which seems to get a lot of DNFs on it . It was never planned that way, just worked out that way it seems.

 

I do know I placed one way back in the beginning which got geocaching banned from a park (folks tended to walk in the same way which created a path which got noticed ...) but I have learnt a lot since then . No doubt I still have a few middle of the road ones but with 50+ now (which is a lot for my area - third highest placer for what is worth) I guess I can be forgiven for not being perfect everytime .

 

So to summarise all that, I am pretty happy if I can place caches which folks enjoy.

 

Andrew

Edited January 12, 2007 by Aushiker

[Aushiker]

Somehow managed to quote myself ... been a long lunch :-)

 

Sorry about that.

 

Andrew

Edited January 12, 2007 by Aushiker

[+Bad_CRC]

please don't hide any more micros.

 

 

we've been drowned in this part of the state over the past few weeks with horrible, badly placed micros. The only regular caches that even get placed anymore are filled with micros and say you must place one of the micros to claim a find.

 

it's pretty much killed geocaching around here.

[Mr.Yuck]

please don't hide any more micros.

 

 

we've been drowned in this part of the state over the past few weeks with horrible, badly placed micros. The only regular caches that even get placed anymore are filled with micros and say you must place one of the micros to claim a find.

 

it's pretty much killed geocaching around here.

 

I looked at your city. I feel for you, brotha. Of course mine will probably be the only message of encouragement for your post.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

we've been drowned in this part of the state over the past few weeks with horrible, badly placed micros. The only regular caches that even get placed anymore are filled with micros and say you must place one of the micros to claim a find.

 

it's pretty much killed geocaching around here.

 

I looked at your city. I feel for you, brotha. Of course mine will probably be the only message of encouragement for your post.

Whoa! "we've been drowned in this part of the state over the past few weeks ..."

 

An increase in the number of hides doesn't sound like geocaching has been killed!

[+txoilgas]

please don't hide any more micros.

we've been drowned in this part of the state over the past few weeks with horrible, badly placed micros. The only regular caches that even get placed anymore are filled with micros and say you must place one of the micros to claim a find.

it's pretty much killed geocaching around here.

I agree that more placements looks like caching is doing pretty good.

 

If you don't want any more micros then go place some ammo cans, etc. Within 50 miles of Rochester there are 475 caches. It looks like you have only found 76 of them and placed 2. A "badly placed" micro is better than no cache. Do not know your defination of "badly placed". The only thing I would call a badly placed micro is at the end of a 1/2 hour hike through the woods.

 

I noticed that you have not gotten one of the easiest to get, a virtual. Soldiers Field Veterans Memorial sounds like a neat cache and besides it gives you a new icon.

 

[+txoilgas]

Back to the topic.

 

I travel quite a bit so my finds are higher than my hides. However when I do hide I try and make them that are not a simple skirt lifter, though I have a couple of those also. I also believe that the quality of the hide is far more important than the volume. I have a couple that took me many hours and many miles of walking to lay out and place. These have not been found often and no one, yet, has complained that they were poorly laid out or the coordinates were incorrect.

 

What I do not understand are those that have thousands of finds with nearly zero hides but that is their choice.

 

So an absolute ratio is not approprate since it does not evaluate quality. My recommendation is to keep in your mind that someone had to place the caches you find and maybe you should do your part.

 

So now everyone go out an place 5 "GOOD" caches this week!!

[Mr.Yuck]

we've been drowned in this part of the state over the past few weeks with horrible, badly placed micros. The only regular caches that even get placed anymore are filled with micros and say you must place one of the micros to claim a find.

 

it's pretty much killed geocaching around here.

 

I looked at your city. I feel for you, brotha. Of course mine will probably be the only message of encouragement for your post.

Whoa! "we've been drowned in this part of the state over the past few weeks ..."

 

An increase in the number of hides doesn't sound like geocaching has been killed!

 

No, it means Geocaching the way he thinks it should be has been killed. (Sorry, couldn't resist )

 

If you don't like them, don't find them (sorry, couldn't resist again).

 

Seriously though BadCRC, my area is much more spewified than that. You'll survive. And I still feel for you.

[+IGJoe]

I think trying to maintain a ratio is slanted an ultimately flawed. I may cache over a very large area (multiple states) but I wouldn't hide outside of 20 miles (or whatever range you feel is reasonable to 'properly' maintain).

 

To go one step further, I would prefer someone wait until they have at least 50 or more under thier belt before hiding thier first. I think it would allow someone to decide if they are committed to the sport/hobby and it gives them more experience on types of hides, camo techniques, how to utilize a locations, etc, etc. New cachers do bring creativity that is VERY VERY welcome but a little experience goes a long way in making those new caches more successful.

 

I have over 130 finds but only 1 hide. That may be low to some people but I have at least 2 others planned and I refuse to put them out until I can set them up properly. I would stop caching before I set something out just to alleviate guilt over a find/hide ratio.

[Backup]

Go to Rankings for Geocachers scroll down and start clicking on "Current stats" and you can see who's a full Geocaching participant and who is just a user. If you don't hide 'em, I can't find 'em.

 

Like all geocaching stats, those don't mean a thing.

 

I'm ranked 612 with 2055 finds and 39 hides... in fact ~200 of those are Pocket Caches (Multiple Event logs) and only 17 of my hides are active - the rest of them are archived caches or events.

 

Beside that I didn't log caches for a long time, or just logged some, so there are hundreds of finds that I did not log online.

 

Nor do those stats indicate the 50 or so fully-stocked ammo boxes and dozen or so micros I have given away at events, to be hidden by the winners... not my hides but I was responsible for them being hidden!

 

Stats will never be a way to evaluate geocachers.

 

I agree that "stats will never be a way to evaluate geocachers" (at least in the context you mention).

 

It does not affect or matter to me:

- How many caches you logged as found (or DNF'ed)

- How many caches you did not log

- How long it took you to log a cache

 

What does have an effect on me is the caches you placed for me to find. A lamppost micro in a shopping mall parking lot will have me Geocaching. If nothing is placed, I can't Geocache.

 

If I drive through a town, and I find X number of caches, the people who placed them had an effect on me (and I thank those who placed them). The caches never placed, for whatever reasoning, have no meaning.

 

If you don't hide 'em, I can't find 'em.

[+Jhwk]

Just for the record, IMHO the whole topic of this thread is what lead to microspew, lampost lameness, geotrash hunting, and other ilk of this type. If you do not hide, you are not a 'real' member of the society. If you don't hide a lot, you are not a 'true' member.

 

when you foist this line of thought upon the masses, expect them to respond, and they did, with trash.

 

two years in, and I am approaching 400 finds. I have hidden 4 (2 which I adopted). Why so few? Small town, limited 'cool' spots, other caches saturate the area, and I'll be damned if I'll put out a cache just to fit your image of a 'true' cacher.

 

I cache, therefore I am a cacher.

[+krisandmel]

please don't hide any more micros.

 

 

we've been drowned in this part of the state over the past few weeks with horrible, badly placed micros. The only regular caches that even get placed anymore are filled with micros and say you must place one of the micros to claim a find.

 

it's pretty much killed geocaching around here.

 

Huh, I've never heard of a breeder-cache like that.

Granted I'm pretty new to this whole thing, but I don't think I would go and find a breeder-cache.

Seems lame.

 

Of course, I could just TNLNSL!

~K