Hide to find ratio

[+Pat in Louisiana]

I have found 522 and hidden 45.

Is this about average 10:1?

[+flask]

kneejerk reaction: why do you care?

 

there are a lot of people who SHOULD have a lot lower hide:find ratios, but don't know any better.

 

i don't have time for 200 hides.

 

 

 

 

not good ones, at any rate. i have yet to see anyone with over 100 hides where i thought the greater majority of them were worth the trouble of looking for them.

[+Star*Hopper]

4.72 : 1.

 

~*

[+BlueDeuce]

I have found 522 and hidden 45.

Is this about average 10:1?

 

Nope. Some have more, some have less.

 

Some people have more interest in placing caches than others. Personally I wish it was just the people who are good at placing caching who would be the majority owners.

 

 

Edit: then/than - as usual.

Edited August 29, 2008 by BlueDeuce

[Skippermark]

27.1:1

[+Pat in Louisiana]

I have found 522 and hidden 45.

Is this about average 10:1?

 

Hmmmmm,

Why do I care? Perhaps I’m just curious. Maybe it is the fact that we have to drive farther and farther to find a cache. Or it could be that we think the sport or pastime or what ever you feel it is should be both give and take. If you enjoy finding caches why not hide one once in a while to perpetuate the experience for others?

 

jmho

[+BlueDeuce]

I have found 522 and hidden 45.

Is this about average 10:1?

 

Hmmmmm,

Why do I care? Perhaps I’m just curious. Maybe it is the fact that we have to drive farther and farther to find a cache. Or it could be that we think the sport or pastime or what ever you feel it is should be both give and take. If you enjoy finding caches why not hide one once in a while to perpetuate the experience for others?

 

jmho

 

I find other ways of giving back, not just by placing caches. The fact you don't have closer caches doesn't mean I ain't helping the sport.

[Mushtang]

My ratio of Hide to Find is:

 

Exactly as many as I currently have time to maintain : Not nearly as many as I wish I had time to go find

[Neos2]

I have found 522 and hidden 45.

Is this about average 10:1?

Actually, it's about 8.6:1 (Not that it matters, really).

 

Our ratio is about the same as yours, but it's completely accidental. I don't think anyone ought to feel obligated to hide a cache no matter how many they have found. Some folks are good at creating hides for others to find, and others just like to find them. Some like to do both.

 

Nice of you to have some out there for others to find.

[+TrailGators]

I would rather have someone contribute by hiding 10 well-maintained caches than to have someone else hide 500 caches only to constantly have 20-30 of them disabled or in need of maintenance. IMHO, they shouldn't let you submit a new cache if you have caches that are disabled or in need of maintenance. So a better question would be what is your ratio of well-maintained caches to your total caches hidden? People that keep that close to 100% are really contributing to the game!

[+Sagefox]

kneejerk reaction: why do you care?

 

This can be a statistic of pure interest rather than a judgment issue. I read that OP is interested in what other people are doing.

 

 

...not good ones, at any rate. i have yet to see anyone with over 100 hides where i thought the greater majority of them were worth the trouble of looking for them.

 

I think ours would have met your greater majority challenge. Not all of them, but the greater majority were o.k. caches in exceptional locations.

[+meark]

36 : 1

[+KoosKoos]

16.5382132234523 : 2.34323433333333

 

approximately

[+WRASTRO]

I have found 522 and hidden 45.

Is this about average 10:1?

 

Hmmmmm,

Why do I care? Perhaps I’m just curious. Maybe it is the fact that we have to drive farther and farther to find a cache. Or it could be that we think the sport or pastime or what ever you feel it is should be both give and take. If you enjoy finding caches why not hide one once in a while to perpetuate the experience for others?

 

jmho

 

I find other ways of giving back, not just by placing caches. The fact you don't have closer caches doesn't mean I ain't helping the sport.

We all give and take in different ways. I replace wet and full logs. I replace damaged containers for cachers who can't get out and maintain a problem cache. I check up on caches that have multiple DNF logs when the hider can't get out. I happen to live in a very cache rich area. Would you have me placing a bunch of lousy hides in order to keep up with some standard that has no meaning? I move a fair number of trackables and maintain a pretty popular (yikes!) TB Space Port. Do I get some sort of bonus points for that?

 

If you have to drive further and further in your area I would suggest you need to be encouraging your local cachers to be more active in hiding.

 

If you are simply interested in the stats and have a way to normalize them then you can check my profile. And you can also check my sock puppet profile where I hide some of my more challenging hides. Used to be my son's account. You figure out what it is.

[+briansnat]

647 / 244

 

I guess that is a little under 3 : 1

[Tahosa and Sons]

Almost 7 years of fun with about 100 hides and less that 500 finds. And yes those hides still out there are maintained and in good repair. Probably because they are all some place in the back country or a granfathered virtual.

[+Waazdag]

I have found 522 and hidden 45.

Is this about average 10:1?

 

When I first got into this, I was concerned about this as well... How many should I hide:find? What's a "good" ratio to keep/maintain? I decided to set a 10:1 ratio, but really, in looking for spots to hide my own caches that weren't just crappy "just cuz there isn't a cache nearby" sort of thing it's not so important to keep a low "Hide:find" ratio. Far better to make the ones you do hide be GOOD hides. I'm considering going back to some hasty micro's I've done and upgrade them just because I'm not as happy with them as when I first hid them. The other thing, in trying to maintain a specific ratio, ALL of the decent/neat/wow spots get taken pretty fast and you'll end up having to drive farther and farther just to find a good place to make a hide that isn't just a magnetic key case inside a flagpole or lampost shroud...

 

Oh... and currently I'm at 6.2121 (rep.):1 Find:Hide Ratio...

[stryder717]

25:1

[+Sagefox]

I replace wet and full logs. I replace damaged containers for cachers who can't get out and maintain a problem cache. I check up on caches that have multiple DNF logs when the hider can't get out. I happen to live in a very cache rich area...

 

...I move a fair number of trackables and maintain a pretty popular (yikes!) TB Space Port.

 

This is a very good answer to this often asked question. There are many good reasons why the number of hides or a find-to-hide ratio is does not measure a person's contribution to this game.

 

I suspect that OP lives in an area that could use more hides. The county we just moved from is larger than Rhode Island (and one other state, I forget which one) and it has only had around 200 caches placed since 2001. We too had to travel for finds.

[+darklighter]

I've found, I think, 55. I have hidden one.

 

My general feeling on it is if I come up with a good spot for a hide, or I have a particular desire to make one, then I will. There really is no need to worry about ratios.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I would rather have someone contribute by hiding 10 well-maintained caches than to have someone else hide 500 caches only to constantly have 20-30 of them disabled or in need of maintenance. IMHO, they shouldn't let you submit a new cache if you have caches that are disabled or in need of maintenance. So a better question would be what is your ratio of well-maintained caches to your total caches hidden? People that keep that close to 100% are really contributing to the game!

 

The GSAK FindStatsGen macro produces a slightly more useful metric for how you've contributed to the game.

 

Number of Finds on caches that you own / Number of caches that you've found .

 

As I am currently on vacation in an area which does not have a lot of caches (Rockland, Maine) I have encountered several caches which are missing (and not always disabled). In one case, I really didn't care that the cache was missing because the published coordinates took me to a really gorgeous spot but there are a couple of others close to the cottage that I am staying in that have been disabled for awhile and I'll likely not be able to get back here anytime soon to find them. I've read the previous logs for many of the caches in this area and the majority of them appear to be from cachers visiting the area. IMHO, contributing to the game also means making caches available to those traveling through an area rather than just catering to the local geocaching community.

[+DocDiTTo]

My ratio of Hide to Find is:

 

Exactly as many as I currently have time to maintain : Not nearly as many as I wish I had time to go find

 

Wow! We have the same ratio!

[+DocDiTTo]

 

The GSAK FindStatsGen macro produces a slightly more useful metric for how you've contributed to the game.

 

Number of Finds on caches that you own / Number of caches that you've found .

 

 

Using that metric, someone who hides one easy (and often found) park & grab will have "contributed to the game" much more than someone who hides one cache in a great location that's harder to access and found rarely. I'd disagree with that assessment.

[+StarBrand]

5.48:1

 

finds:hides

[+Star*Hopper]

My 4.7:1 ratio might look rather low (higher than normal hides to finds), but there's a reason for it. I live in a smallish town ( pop'n ~22000 & declining) & there's only one other active cacher who lives here. I only have maybe another 12-15 to find & I'll have 'cleaned' the area. So, I'm putting out more caches to try to help promote the game around here. (I have other plans under way too - but that's another topic.)

 

The way I see it, it behooves me to recruit new players & get them to putting out hides, so I won't have to travel to other areas of the state in order to play. I'm retired & on a fixed income, and the budget is very tight. Gas prices have about made traveling prohibitive.

 

~*

[Skippermark]

This same discussion came up in our local forum. A cacher was called out by name in the 400+ member forum about why they haven't placed a cache.

 

My thoughts are that if someone wants to give back and place a cache for others that's great, but we shouldn't guilt them into placing a cache. I'd rather they wait until they're excited about placing one and put some thought into it rather than toss a container anywhere to appease people.

 

That said, I wish more people placed more caches more often. I love finding caches and wish there were more local ones that I could find rather than having to drive 20 miles away.

Edited August 29, 2008 by Skippermark

[+Headhardhat]

I never really could understand any importance to the hide/find ratio. The beauty of this game is the freedom to do what feels good to you (guidelines included of course). Be it finding a million parking lot micros or walking miles in the woods for one. If you enjoy it, go for it without being labeled to someone elses expectations. Who cares if you found 10k and hid any?

 

I live near Raleigh, NC which has thousands upon thousands of hides. I also work in Oxford, NC that when I started geocaching had about a dozen or so hides. I must admit I absolutely loved almost tripling the amount of quality hides up there with two complete series and really appreciated caches that now bridge Oxford to Henderson. I get a couple emails a month from cachers that now go up there just to spend the afternoon in a new area for caching. I also adopted over 30 caches and have almost restored all of them. Does this make me a better cacher than anybody else? Heck no! I just found a creative outlet that makes this game special for me. We all find different ways of helping make this obsession fun. Adding swag without being asked, drying a wet cache, putting in a new log book, etc. Numbers are for people who like numbers. Good for them, I really get the impression that for the most part they are pretty much ignored. Which is fine by me.

 

-HHH

Edited August 29, 2008 by Headhardhat

[+palser]

342 Finds- 112 Hides = 3:1

 

We don't have a lot of hide activity (used to!) right now and the only way to fuel may passion for being outside (caching) is to place some hides. Things are looking up outside our area (50+ miles) with more hides, so I will be hitting those trails soon.

 

Dr. P

[+Renegade Knight]

20:1 It's actually closer to 20:1.5 but I've adopted out a lot of caches and a lot are listed on other sites.

[+Moose Mob]

There are a lot of thoughts with this.

 

Some feel that you should have a 10:1 ratio. This thought is fine when you have found 100 caches, but if you found 10,000 caches, could you maintain 1000 cache placements?

 

Another thought.... do you have to place caches in order to "give back"? There are a lot of unmaintained caches out there, we don't need more?

 

In summary, place caches because you want to, not because you feel you have to.

 

/steps off soap box

[Skippermark]

Also, "giving back" doesn't have to mean placing a cache. It could mean replacing a broken container with a new one if the owner no longer caches.

 

Or dropping in a new log book if the original is full

 

Or taking out all the junk in a cache and replacing it with some fresh swag.

 

Sometimes those are the "heroes" of caching because their efforts often go unnoticed.

[+DanOCan]

 

The GSAK FindStatsGen macro produces a slightly more useful metric for how you've contributed to the game.

 

Number of Finds on caches that you own / Number of caches that you've found .

 

 

Using that metric, someone who hides one easy (and often found) park & grab will have "contributed to the game" much more than someone who hides one cache in a great location that's harder to access and found rarely. I'd disagree with that assessment.

 

I'd agree with your disagreement. Some of my better caches are the ones that get the fewest finds.

 

On the original topic, I'm running around 85 Finds / Hide. When I come up with locations and/or ideas I'll place more if I feel I can maintain them, otherwise that ratio will just keep getting higher and higher. I will never feel guilty about not hiding enough caches.

[+Jayrod7]

Just think if everyone hid a cache for every 5 caches they find....there would be thousands of caches being placed a day.

 

Im sitting around 100:1 now

[+TrailGators]

There are a lot of thoughts with this.

 

Some feel that you should have a 10:1 ratio. This thought is fine when you have found 100 caches, but if you found 10,000 caches, could you maintain 1000 cache placements?

 

Another thought.... do you have to place caches in order to "give back"? There are a lot of unmaintained caches out there, we don't need more?

 

In summary, place caches because you want to, not because you feel you have to.

 

/steps off soap box

/Claps and cheers

[+Snoogans]

I have 669 finds and 71 (soon to be 73+) hides. (On my Snoogans account)

 

So, that's a ratio of 9 point sumthin, sumthin', sumthin':1. (That you know of on this cache listing site.)

 

Also, "giving back" doesn't have to mean placing a cache. It could mean replacing a broken container with a new one if the owner no longer caches.

 

Or dropping in a new log book if the original is full

 

Or taking out all the junk in a cache and replacing it with some fresh swag.

 

Sometimes those are the "heroes" of caching because their efforts often go unnoticed.

 

Agreed!

[+lordzogat]

10:1 considering one "hide" was adopted.

[+Star*Hopper]

On the other side of that 'giving back' coin....

We've got a semi-local couple that comes thru from time to time -- he has ~400 finds, she has over 1100.

They don't own a single cache. And all I have EVER seen them log is: "tftc"

(And I have checked dozens of their logs, just trying to see if they ever get......'expansive'.)

 

tftc. Not even a capital letter. And it doesn't matter if it's a lamp post micro, or comes with a ride on the Space Shuttle & ya get to keep the helmets. "tftc"

 

Now, I know it is wrong, Wrong WRONG of me....but every time I see them log one of mine, I almost wish they'd stayed away.

 

I'm so ashamed of myself. I think.

~*

[+DrAwKwArD]

tftc. Not even a capital letter. And it doesn't matter if it's a lamp post micro, or comes with a ride on the Space Shuttle & ya get to keep the helmets. "tftc"

 

Yeah, that bugs me sometimes too.

 

I'm currently in the 9.34/1 club. If you asked me a year ago I'd have to say 16/1. I've got the hiding bug just enough that my planning isn't as great as it should be. I could see it getting out of hand real easy with cachers placing 10-20 a week. Fortunately, I'm not quite to that level.

[+entogeek]

Current ration is 4.5:1 but that's because I new to geocaching. Like a previous poster stated, I find myself bitten by the hiding bug more than the searching virus (probably cause I get too easily frustrated when I can't find the cache that I've been staring at for 10 minutes). After a couple of simple hides, I'm now trying to put some thought into the mystery caches I make and I especially look forward to the interaction with my fellow cachers who let me know when they get part way through a puzzle and contact me for assistance. And then of course I try to make the cache itself a little interesting, eg. one micro cache has a "guardian" that protects it that freaks out many folks - think creepy-crawly with 8 legs! I love reading what they post about this cache. I especially like the comments folks leave in the on-line log and what they also write in the log book itself. As an owner, I'd probably be a little frustrated if after spending some time putting together a challenging puzzle cache someone simply wrote tftc - but then everyone is entitled to write as much or as little as they like.

Edited August 30, 2008 by entogeek

[+anakerose]

Mine is 14.67 finds to 1 hide

 

At the time I had 411 finds and 28 hides

[+Star*Hopper]

"... eg. one micro cache has a "guardian" that protects it that freaks out many folks - think creepy-crawly with 8 legs! I love reading what they post about this cache. ..."

 

You've got a cache octupus!?!?!?

 

And it gets logs????? Ew.

 

~*

[+entogeek]

Not quite an octupus but close! It's a tarantula! Hee-hee-hee-hee

 

"... eg. one micro cache has a "guardian" that protects it that freaks out many folks - think creepy-crawly with 8 legs! I love reading what they post about this cache. ..."

 

You've got a cache octupus!?!?!?

 

And it gets logs????? Ew.

 

~*

[+emmett]

.

 

423:76 or about 5:1 - This is a possible sign of mental illness.

 

If we use hidden waypoints as opposed to hidden caches ...

 

423:215 which is less than 2:1 - This is clear confirmation of mental illness.

 

.

[+BlueDeuce]

20:1

[+DiamondDaveG]

After reading through the list, I guess I'm one one the 'high-side' of the scale.

 

Currently I am sitting with a 125:1.

 

I am with a number of others that think some people shouldn't be hiding any at all, especially if all they do is toss a film can out the window at every wide spot in the road. Personally, my number of hides is low because 'over think' them. There is a local park where I was working on a couple hides, but before I liked my finished product someone else swooped in and dropped 4 very nice, well placed and well thought out hides. I wish I was that creative that fast.

 

To sum it all up (a little too late to make a long story short), some of us should have a large ratio and some shouldn't.

 

-edited for spelling-

Edited December 21, 2008 by DiamondDaveG

[+w2b]

100% of the caches I have found have a smiley and 100% of my cache hides have a smiley so that 100- 100 ratio?

[+Parabola]

2042:22

 

I've got a couple more planned but I wont go over what I can maintain. That 22 are not all active at this time. If I can't keep up with maintance, I will archive it and open up the area to someone that does have the time to do maintace. But it seem's alot of people just expect other's to do the maintance for them.

[gpsman77]

Hide : Find

 

12 : 29

 

That is 1:2.4

[Skippermark]

After reading through the list, I guess I'm one one the 'high-side' of the scale.

 

Currently I am sitting with a 125:1.

I don't think the "numbers" of finds/hides really means that much. I think it's more important how people are at maintaining and keeping their caches up and running.

 

We were looking to go caching in a different state not far from where we live and saw a huge cluster of caches and got excited because it would be a lot of finds in a central area. Well, as we began looking at them, we started seeing lots of problems. Quite a few had lots of recent DNFs (on pretty easy caches). People that had previously found them said they stopped by and think they're missing because they couldn't find them.

 

The ones that were found had problems, with people saying the log was a soggy mess, all drippy. Finders would sign a dry piece of paper and leave, but it would soon get wet. When we'd see problems, we'd take those caches off our "to do" list. The large cluster of caches we'd planned to find dropped from 25 to about 5, and it wasn't even worth heading to that area. The sad thing is all of these caches were placed by one person who started up, placed a ton of caches around town and then stopped maintaining them months ago and eventually stopped logging into GC.com all together.

[+ras_oscar]

I plan on hiding a cache once I have sufficient experience to add to the sport.