Cache Difficulty / terrain guide lines...

[+mchaos]

I looked around, and searched the forum for this, maybe I am blinde but I could not find what I was looking for.

 

There should be some guidelines to help cache hiders rate the cache difficulty and terrain. Every one is different. To some people a terrain is harder to them then others, and vice versa.

 

There should be a page to standardize the rating to help them rate their cache.

 

Some times I am not sure about how hard it is going to be until some cachers post saying it is harder or easyer then I rate it.

 

I just wish there was something to go by.

[+Lil Devil]

On the "Report/Edit a Cache Listing" page, right next to where you select the difficulty and terrain ratings is a link that takes you to this system to rate your cache. Perhaps you missed it.

[+Isonzo Karst]

If you've not hidden a cache you might not see the clayjar rating system.

 

There's a Knowledgebase article about rating for difficulty and terrain

[+J-Way]

Or you could pick random numbers, which is what I think some cachers do. And for some reason these people seem to think the Difficulty and Terrain ratings have to be the same. The cache is in plain site but requires a boat? That's a 5/5 for sure. Really difficult puzzle with the container in a level wheelchair friendly parking lot? That's a 4/4.

 

But for normal people the clayjar system works well (see link in post #2, or link from the cache submittal page). And the difficulty rating can be different from the terrain rating.

Edited January 28, 2009 by J-Way

[+briansnat]

Here are the accepted definitions:

 

Difficulty rating:

* Easy. In plain sight or can be found in a few minutes of searching.

** Average. The average cache hunter would be able to find this in less than 30 minutes of hunting.

*** Challenging. An experienced cache hunter will find this challenging, and it could take up a good portion of an afternoon.

**** Difficult. A real challenge for the experienced cache hunter - may require special skills or knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days / trips to complete.

***** Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache.

 

Terrain rating:

* Handicapped accessible. (Terrain is likely to be paved, is relatively flat, and less than a 1/2 mile hike is required.)

** Suitable for small children. (Terrain is generally along marked trails, there are no steep elevation changes or heavy overgrowth. Less than a 2 mile hike required.)

*** Not suitable for small children. (The average adult or older child should be OK depending on physical condition. Terrain is likely off-trail. May have one or more of the following: some overgrowth, some steep elevation changes, or more than a 2 mile hike.)

**** Experienced outdoor enthusiasts only. (Terrain is probably off-trail. Will have one or more of the following: very heavy overgrowth, very steep elevation (requiring use of hands), or more than a 10 mile hike. May require an overnight stay.)

***** Requires specialized equipment and knowledge or experience, (boat, 4WD, rock climbing, SCUBA, etc) or is otherwise extremely difficult.

 

I find that using the Clayjar system tends to over rate the terrain difficulty by .5 to 1 star when compared with the above definitions, so I just rate my caches according to these definitions.

[+Taoiseach]

Here are the accepted definitions:

 

Difficulty rating:

* Easy. In plain sight or can be found in a few minutes of searching.

** Average. The average cache hunter would be able to find this in less than 30 minutes of hunting.

*** Challenging. An experienced cache hunter will find this challenging, and it could take up a good portion of an afternoon.

**** Difficult. A real challenge for the experienced cache hunter - may require special skills or knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days / trips to complete.

***** Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache.

 

Terrain rating:

* Handicapped accessible. (Terrain is likely to be paved, is relatively flat, and less than a 1/2 mile hike is required.)

** Suitable for small children. (Terrain is generally along marked trails, there are no steep elevation changes or heavy overgrowth. Less than a 2 mile hike required.)

*** Not suitable for small children. (The average adult or older child should be OK depending on physical condition. Terrain is likely off-trail. May have one or more of the following: some overgrowth, some steep elevation changes, or more than a 2 mile hike.)

**** Experienced outdoor enthusiasts only. (Terrain is probably off-trail. Will have one or more of the following: very heavy overgrowth, very steep elevation (requiring use of hands), or more than a 10 mile hike. May require an overnight stay.)

***** Requires specialized equipment and knowledge or experience, (boat, 4WD, rock climbing, SCUBA, etc) or is otherwise extremely difficult.

 

I find that using the Clayjar system tends to over rate the terrain difficulty by .5 to 1 star when compared with the above definitions, so I just rate my caches according to these definitions.

 

I like those definitions - There's a bit of a jump between Terrain 3 and Terrain 4 (I would likely call the Terrain 4 definition a Terrain 4 1/2). I'm not sure that I would call something a terrain 4 just because it is a ten mile hike. If it were a 10 mile hike on a nice trail, and then the cache was 100' off of the trail, I would probably still call it a terrain 1 1/2 or 2.

 

I suggest doing what I do for difficulty ratings - Rarely are you going to come up with something that is entirely unique, so I always try to find a similar puzzle, and use it's difficulty rating as a precedent.

[+briansnat]

I like those definitions - There's a bit of a jump between Terrain 3 and Terrain 4 (I would likely call the Terrain 4 definition a Terrain 4 1/2). I'm not sure that I would call something a terrain 4 just because it is a ten mile hike. If it were a 10 mile hike on a nice trail, and then the cache was 100' off of the trail, I would probably still call it a terrain 1 1/2 or 2.

 

I agree that it isn't perfect but it's what we've been using here (or should be) since about 2001. You can use it as a base point and take it from there

 

I suggest doing what I do for difficulty ratings - Rarely are you going to come up with something that is entirely unique, so I always try to find a similar puzzle, and use it's difficulty rating as a precedent.

 

Careful because a lot of people don't rate their stuff properly. I've found a 4 star terrain cache that involved a 50 ft walk from the parking lot and a walk up a hill with a few logs to step over and I've found a one star terrain cache that took me down a hillside, across a stream, along a rocky trail and through a swamp.

 

I've found 4 star difficulty caches in a matter of a few minutes and have been completely stumped by 1 star difficulty caches.

 

Way too many people have no clue how to rate their caches.

Edited January 29, 2009 by briansnat

[+Taoiseach]

Careful because a lot of people don't rate their stuff properly. I've found a 4 star terrain cache that involved a 50 ft walk from the parking lot and a walk up a hill with a few logs to step over and I've found a one star terrain cache that took me down a hillside, across a stream, along a rocky trail and through a swamp.

 

I've found 4 star difficulty caches in a matter of a few minutes and have been completely stumped by 1 star difficulty caches.

 

Way too many people have no clue how to rate their caches.

 

True, true...

 

I tend to not use precedent for terrain, just my own judgement and experience with caches of differing terrain ratings (The only one that I haven't found yet is 4 1/2 (well, I have, but it was a misrated Island cache that hails from before the boat=5 terrain rule was really being enforced), coupled with those guidelines.

 

I like precedent, though, because I often have a hard time judging the difficulty of my own puzzles

Edited January 29, 2009 by Taoiseach

[Neos2]

I like those definitions - There's a bit of a jump between Terrain 3 and Terrain 4 (I would likely call the Terrain 4 definition a Terrain 4 1/2). I'm not sure that I would call something a terrain 4 just because it is a ten mile hike. If it were a 10 mile hike on a nice trail, and then the cache was 100' off of the trail, I would probably still call it a terrain 1 1/2 or 2.

So might a few other people who are in good shape and have no impediments to walking long distances--which is why it is a good idea not to change the number that drastically. Just because it isn't difficult for you to walk that far doesn't mean it isn't a challenge for most people. I'd be willing to bet the "average" person isn't used to walking ten miles in one day---and certainly not walking another ten miles back.

 

I can walk a couple of miles on flat ground before I start to question the wisdom of being where I am. At four miles, I'm in real pain. I suffer that day, and the next, too. I have even greater difficulty walking up hill, even gentle grades. A mile of uphill grade can do the same thing to me that four miles of level hiking does to most other people. That doesn't mean I don't do longish hikes now and then, but if I am looking for a day without pain, I look for low rated terrain caches or I go on several shorter hikes and rest between them.

 

I also change my rating up or down by as much as .5, but never more than that--even though what is a 2 for most people is a 3 or a 4 for me. Even if I personally disagree with how difficult or challenging the rating is, there must be some sort of consistency for the rating to be worth using at all.

[+Taoiseach]

I like those definitions - There's a bit of a jump between Terrain 3 and Terrain 4 (I would likely call the Terrain 4 definition a Terrain 4 1/2). I'm not sure that I would call something a terrain 4 just because it is a ten mile hike. If it were a 10 mile hike on a nice trail, and then the cache was 100' off of the trail, I would probably still call it a terrain 1 1/2 or 2.

So might a few other people who are in good shape and have no impediments to walking long distances--which is why it is a good idea not to change the number that drastically. Just because it isn't difficult for you to walk that far doesn't mean it isn't a challenge for most people. I'd be willing to bet the "average" person isn't used to walking ten miles in one day---and certainly not walking another ten miles back.

 

I can walk a couple of miles on flat ground before I start to question the wisdom of being where I am. At four miles, I'm in real pain. I suffer that day, and the next, too. I have even greater difficulty walking up hill, even gentle grades. A mile of uphill grade can do the same thing to me that four miles of level hiking does to most other people. That doesn't mean I don't do longish hikes now and then, but if I am looking for a day without pain, I look for low rated terrain caches or I go on several shorter hikes and rest between them.

 

I also change my rating up or down by as much as .5, but never more than that--even though what is a 2 for most people is a 3 or a 4 for me. Even if I personally disagree with how difficult or challenging the rating is, there must be some sort of consistency for the rating to be worth using at all.

 

Fair enough, but I probably still would call that a 1 1/2 or 2, but make sure to add on the significant hike attribute or say that there is a rather long walk in the cache description.

 

To be perfectly honest, after 10 miles, I'd probably be tired as well. Fortunately I am of a state that would allow me to be able to walk back, but I tend to not like to walk much more than 10 or 12 miles round trip.

 

I still don't think that length alone is cause for a really high terrain rating - especially if it is pretty much all on a nice (& possibly paved) path

[+J-Way]

10-12 miles round trip, even on a level trail, should never be rated as low as 1.5. Your average geocacher (especially with a kid or two in tow) would not be able to manage that.

 

Actually, I did a cache that had about a 2-mile round trip over a mostly level trail. It was rated as a 3.0 terrain which I thought was way too high... until I actually started. I felt like I was dieing by the time I made it back to the car. The problem was that the trail was in loose wind-blown sand, it was kinda hot (low 90's), and I had a 35-lb 3-year-old on my shoulders for most of the trip. Walking up a 6-ft-tall loose dune with that much extra weight will kill your stamina in a hurry.

[+ArcherDragoon]

Here are the accepted definitions:

 

Difficulty rating:

* Easy. In plain sight or can be found in a few minutes of searching.

** Average. The average cache hunter would be able to find this in less than 30 minutes of hunting.

*** Challenging. An experienced cache hunter will find this challenging, and it could take up a good portion of an afternoon.

**** Difficult. A real challenge for the experienced cache hunter - may require special skills or knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days / trips to complete.

***** Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache.

 

Terrain rating:

* Handicapped accessible. (Terrain is likely to be paved, is relatively flat, and less than a 1/2 mile hike is required.)

** Suitable for small children. (Terrain is generally along marked trails, there are no steep elevation changes or heavy overgrowth. Less than a 2 mile hike required.)

*** Not suitable for small children. (The average adult or older child should be OK depending on physical condition. Terrain is likely off-trail. May have one or more of the following: some overgrowth, some steep elevation changes, or more than a 2 mile hike.)

**** Experienced outdoor enthusiasts only. (Terrain is probably off-trail. Will have one or more of the following: very heavy overgrowth, very steep elevation (requiring use of hands), or more than a 10 mile hike. May require an overnight stay.)

***** Requires specialized equipment and knowledge or experience, (boat, 4WD, rock climbing, SCUBA, etc) or is otherwise extremely difficult.

 

I find that using the Clayjar system tends to over rate the terrain difficulty by .5 to 1 star when compared with the above definitions, so I just rate my caches according to these definitions.

I use the Clayjar for an initial rating...then use the descriptions above to tweak the ratings a bit...normally, the terrain is reduced as Briansnat stated...

[+uxorious]

If it were a 10 mile hike on a nice trail, and then the cache was 100' off of the trail, I would probably still call it a terrain 1 1/2 or 2.

 

There was a time, many years ago, a ten mile hike on an easy trail would have been a nice day trip for me. I now have trouble making a half mile round trip hike.

 

Having limited mobility in my older years makes me more aware of differences in other's abilities.

 

These days, a ten mile hike on a level smooth relatively wide path would be a 1.5 for me, as I would take my mobility scooter. Thirty years ago it would have been at least a 2.5, but would have been more fun, as I would have walked it.

 

The point is, when I see someone under rate their cache it sort of bothers me as it is important to seek caches I can do. It can be frustrating to get to a trail head for a 1.5 cache and the GPSr tells me it is way too far to try for.

 

By using a system such as Biansnat's, it makes it easier for everyone to be closer to the same page for ratings.

 

By the way, what bothers me even more is people who refuse to give their cache a higher terrain rating than a 1 when it is not wheelchair accessible. Come on people, it is hard enough for those that must cache from a wheelchair, give them a break, and rate your cache right.

[+TrailGators]

If it were a 10 mile hike on a nice trail, and then the cache was 100' off of the trail, I would probably still call it a terrain 1 1/2 or 2.

 

There was a time, many years ago, a ten mile hike on an easy trail would have been a nice day trip for me. I now have trouble making a half mile round trip hike.

 

Having limited mobility in my older years makes me more aware of differences in other's abilities.

 

These days, a ten mile hike on a level smooth relatively wide path would be a 1.5 for me, as I would take my mobility scooter. Thirty years ago it would have been at least a 2.5, but would have been more fun, as I would have walked it.

 

The point is, when I see someone under rate their cache it sort of bothers me as it is important to seek caches I can do. It can be frustrating to get to a trail head for a 1.5 cache and the GPSr tells me it is way too far to try for.

 

By using a system such as Briansnat's, it makes it easier for everyone to be closer to the same page for ratings.

 

By the way, what bothers me even more is people who refuse to give their cache a higher terrain rating than a 1 when it is not wheelchair accessible. Come on people, it is hard enough for those that must cache from a wheelchair, give them a break, and rate your cache right.

A ten mile flat hike on an established trail is a 3 for terrain. That was an easy one. However, it can get tricky when you start introducing obstacles. Everyone seems to have a different view of what bushwhacking is. I've done caches that you needed a machete to find (only because I took the wrong way to the cache). Anyhow, I wish that everyone would try to use the Clayjar system. It does help make ratings much more consistent than everyone just making stuff up. Edited January 29, 2009 by TrailGators

[+Taoiseach]

By the way, what bothers me even more is people who refuse to give their cache a higher terrain rating than a 1 when it is not wheelchair accessible. Come on people, it is hard enough for those that must cache from a wheelchair, give them a break, and rate your cache right.

 

CacheDrone won't even publish a terrain 1 without the wheelchair friendly icon.

 

And as for the ten mile hike, like I said, I would warn of the length of the hike in the cache description, and recommend a bicycle or some other mode of transit (or parking closer). Length does not equal difficult terrain.

 

A long hike on easy terrain is still easy terrain. That's what the 'Significant Hike' attribute is for.

[+TrailGators]

Length does not equal difficult terrain.

 

A long hike on easy terrain is still easy terrain. That's what the 'Significant Hike' attribute is for.

Length is a major factor of the terrain rating system that this site uses:

[+StarBrand]

Right wrong or indifferent - if we ALL used the ClayJar system it would provide a consistent set of ratings. Would it not?

[+TrailGators]

Right wrong or indifferent - if we ALL used the ClayJar system it would provide a consistent set of ratings. Would it not?

Yes, it would and it does because most people seem to understand it and follow it when they submit their caches. The inconsistencies are a result of people not following it. The link is right in the new cache submittal form and yet many people (that own caches) still start threads to ask about how to do it. Maybe they need to put neon lights around that link in the form... Edited January 29, 2009 by TrailGators