Found:Hides Ratio?

[+finsinc]

Just wondering what people's opinions are of what an appropiate ratio of found geocaches to geocaches you hide.

[+9Key]

Hide as many as you can maintain. If its just one, then that's fine.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Yup. That's the right ratio.

[+gof1]

Ratios are not a good idea. Some people can maintain a hundred or more great hides. Others can't handle one crappy cache.

 

I know of a couple of cachers who think they need to maintain a ratio and they end up hiding lots of crappy caches that end up wet and or missing.

[+the hermit crabs]

Find-to-hide ratios are pointless and make no sense at all.

[+Totem Clan]

340 to 19 is the correct amount. At least till I find or hide another.

 

In other words it doesn't really matter. I've seen hides that were very well done by folks with few, or least in one case, no hides. Then I've seen some really poor hides done by folks with literally 1,000's of finds. While logic would say that the more you've found, the better your hides should be just because of the experience. However there is more to hiding a good cache than just seeing many other caches.

[+Okiebryan]

Personally I try to maintain about 10%, but when my numbers get stupid high, that will be unrealistic. YMMV.

[+TeamGumbo]

91 to 3

 

[+gof1]

One to one. I re-hide every one I find.

[+Miragee]

Just wondering what people's opinions are of what an appropiate ratio of found geocaches to geocaches you hide.

Some people have the "hiding muse" and like to hide caches. Some of these people do a good job. Some don't. Other people don't possess the "hiding muse" and should not feel pressured to hide a cache. Then there are people who travel frequently, or for some other reason know they would not be able to properly maintain a cache.

 

There should not be a recommended "Find to Hide Ratio."

[+KoosKoos]

If you can't maintain a 19.23593 to 2.32939999999999 ratio, then you need to have your membership revoked!

 

Seriously, trying to get people to maintain some hide ratio is a terrible idea.

[+Isonzo Karst]

A ratio sounds good to someone with a few hundred finds, say around 10% hides to finds.

 

Time passes, now you've got 4000+ finds -> you want 400+ hides? mmm, maybe not...

 

Hide when you're happy. That'll work out good

Edited April 11, 2008 by Isonzo Karst

[+BCandMsKitty]

One to one. I re-hide every one I find.

[+TotemLake]

I hide exactly the number I think I can maintain and not one more over that.

 

I had one cache that sucked 2 ammo boxes a tupperware container, and $100 worth of goodies (not to mention another kind cacher's contributions) before I gave up on it and archived it. It also didn't help that I had to CITO what became somebody's toilet when there was one just a mere 100 or so feet away with all the niceties one could expect for the usage.

[+TrailGators]

I hide exactly the number I think I can maintain and not one more over that.

That is the right number.

 

A better question would be: How many of your caches should be messed up at once? If that number is too big then you are not doing anyone any favors by keeping some ratio that you can't maintain.

Edited April 11, 2008 by TrailGators

[Dinoprophet]

You must maintain a 15:1 ratio. But you also cannot hide a cache until you've found at least 200. Violate these rules and you'll ruin it for everyone.

Edited April 11, 2008 by Dinoprophet

[+WRASTRO]

It seems that this was a big forums issue two or three years ago but the game has evolved since then. I think the right answer is to hide a cache if you find a good spot and you can maintain it. Otherwise find caches and enjoy the game.

[+karstic]

I like the pi ratio

[+gof1]

I like the pi ratio

 

I like pie to.

[+TrailGators]

I like the pi ratio

 

I like pie too.

Me too!

[+gof1]

And typo corections corrections.

[+WRASTRO]

Apple, Blackberry and Cherry are my favorites.

[+The Jester]

My favorite: Pi are not squared, pie are round. Cake are squared.

 

Makes as much sense as a find/hide ratio.

Edited April 11, 2008 by The Jester

[+WRASTRO]

My favorite: Pi are not squared, pie are round. Cake are squared.

 

Makes as much sense as a find/hide ratio.

 

But the cakes I usually enjoy are round, and I prefer pie, round or squared. And my find to find ratio is almost 1. Find to hide ratio is somewhat different.

[+TrailGators]

My find to pie ratio is almost equal to 1!

[+gof1]

No Equal, use real sugar.

[+Keruso]

hey Jester, you might want to quote that before someone else does!!!

 

ive hidden 10, found 55. good ratio there!

[+TrailGators]

hey Jester, you might want to quote that before someone else does!!!

 

ive hidden 10, found 55. good ratio there!

But how many pies have you eaten? That's what really matters!

[+Klondike Mike]

I've recently decided to strive for a 10% ratio. That being 10% or less of my hides to be lum caches

[+GrnXnham]

2544 to 11 works for us.

[+briansnat]

Just wondering what people's opinions are of what an appropiate ratio of found geocaches to geocaches you hide.

 

Whatever you feel is good for you is a good ratio. Some like to hide, some like to find and some like to do both. If you've found 10,000 caches, don't feel obligated to hide one if it isn't your thing.

[+Keruso]

hey Jester, you might want to quote that before someone else does!!!

 

ive hidden 10, found 55. good ratio there!

But how many pies have you eaten? That's what really matters!

 

dont like pie! cookies are better!

[+gof1]

hey Jester, you might want to quote that before someone else does!!!

 

ive hidden 10, found 55. good ratio there!

But how many pies have you eaten? That's what really matters!

 

dont like pie! cookies are better!

 

But cookies aren't as much fun to toss.

[+Keruso]

that depends on what you eat before you toss them. this one time, i remeber eating spaghetti before going caching......................

[+wimseyguy]

Just wondering what people's opinions are of what an appropiate ratio of found geocaches to geocaches you hide.

Fun had finding caches:desired responsibility level for properly maintaining hidden caches.

[+nekom]

I really hate that I'll screw up my current ratio next time I go caching, cause I'm at 77:7 right now, how cool is that! Lucky numbers and all.

[+The Leprechauns]

I really hate that I'll screw up my current ratio next time I go caching, cause I'm at 77:7 right now, how cool is that! Lucky numbers and all.

You could find eight caches and hide a cache at the 7-11. Then you'd be at 88:8.

[GPS-Hermit]

I refuse to hide a cache unless it is going to be what I think is a good one. One with an interesting location and a for sure hunt. Doesn't have to be a long hunt but ya got to look around to find it. So far I have found over 100 and only hidden 5. I am picky about the ones I try to find and really want the hiking part to be of quality.

[+paleolith]

51 to 3. (Common factors removed. I don't count the one I adopted.)

 

I've found some caches from a hider who tries to maintain a 10:1 ratio. Some are great, old caches. Others have the look and feel of "I found ten so I need to hide one".

 

Also, there are areas where not enough people are finding caches to justify new hides. Early in the game, new hides were almost always a Good Thing, assuming they were Good Hides. But if an area has several caches and they are getting found a couple of times a year, maybe there are too many caches there.

 

Remember the global find:hide ratio. If the number of finds is constant, then more caches means fewer finds per cache. So if you hide a bunch of caches and don't get many finds, consider whether the number of caches is excessive for the activity in your area.

 

Of course, this assumes that finding is independent of hiding. Early in the game, one obviously needed more hides to provide interest to draw people to the game. This is still true in many areas. But in other areas, there's strong evidence that finding activity is not increasing due to more hides -- on the contrary, finding activity seems to be constant, and the result of more hides seems to be fewer finds/hide. If you see this in your area, perhaps the appropriate response is to try to bring more people into the game rather than hiding more caches. Or just accept that it's reached its limit for now.

 

Edward