Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 35
Carbon Hunter

Statistics - bend it anyway you like!

Recommended Posts

For the stats thread too:

 

SA has just reached 287 active Earthcaches! Keep them coming - 300 is just around the corner. Western Cape remain the leading province - and actually extend their lead.

 

a rough indicator:

 

ECs by Prov

 

1 Western Cape 58

2 Eastern Cape 49

3 Kwazulu Natal 47

4 Gauteng 42

5 Mpumalanga 41

6 Northern Cape 20

7 Limpopo 17

8 North West 8

9 Free State 4

Share this post


Link to post

ABC GeoArt statistics:

 

The ABC GeoArt series is about 10km SSE from Pietermaritzburg, and consists of 49 mystery caches, one regular cache and one multi.

These 51 caches have been placed by TechnoNut and V-ixen between 22 November 2014 and 26 January 2015. They are currently all findable.

 

ABC.jpg

 

Total number of finds: 1182

Average finds/cache: 23.2

Most finds: 29 (GC5GXP3 ABC #16 - Shale Hut)

Fewest finds: 19 (GC5KDVD ABC #51 - The Final Bonus)

Most DNFs: 2 (GC5GXP3 ABC #16 - Shale Hut, and GC5KDND ABC #06 - Nature Calls)

Most notes: 4 (GC5GXP3 ABC #16 - Shale Hut, and GC5KDVD ABC #51 - The Final Bonus)

Total number of Favourite Points: 93

Average FPs/cache: 1.8

 

Most FPs:

1. GC5KDVD  ABC #51 - The Final Bonus:      12 FPs
2. GC5KDND  ABC #06 - Nature Calls:	     9 FPs
3. GC5KDN2  ABC #04 - Stringfellas:	     8 FPs
  GC5KDJ3  ABC #19 - Department of Defence: 8 FPs
5. GC5KDME  ABC #47 - Lonely, I'm so Lonely: 7 FPs
  GC5KDGT  ABC #05 - Skullduggery:	     7 FPs
  GC5KDHJ  ABC #13 - Plain View:	     7 FPs

Cachers with the most ABC GeoArt finds:

Garethmo:	51
HL777:	        51
JediJoe:	51
KINGOSRIC:	51
Sclanders Clan:	51
TechnoNut:      51
V-ixen:         51
Westview4:	51
Wh00:	        51
davmur:	        51
geocacher_coza:	51
mills369:	51
mlornelh:	51
waco&winnie:	51

(To be fair, I added own caches to the owners' finds.)

 

Only 34 cachers have logged finds on this series.

Average no. of finds/cacher: 31.9

Edited by Danie Viljoen

Share this post


Link to post

ABC GeoArt statistics:

 

The ABC GeoArt series is about 10km SSE from Pietermaritzburg, and consists of 49 mystery caches, one regular cache and one multi.

These 51 caches have been placed by TechnoNut and V-ixen between 22 November 2014 and 26 January 2015. They are currently all findable.

 

Total number of Favourite Points: 93

Average FPs/cache: 1.8

 

 

Danie - thanks for the stats - Just an update. Total FPs is now 100 for an average of 1.96.

 

V-ixen and I are quite pleased with the way the KZN cachers have received this series. [:D]

Share this post


Link to post

PE and Love PE GeoArt series statistics:

 

The Love PE Series and the PE Series consist of 12 and 20 mystery caches respectively.

These 32 caches have been placed by erenei and FireflyAfrica between 3 October 2013 and 16 August 2014.

They are south of Port Elizabeth, in the Schoenmakerskop area. They are currently all findable.

 

Love%20PE%20series.jpg

 

Total number of finds: 947

Average finds/cache: 29.6

Most finds: 50 (GC4PR2Q PE series #1: Quick Response)

Fewest finds: 14 (9 of the Love PE series caches)

Total number of Favourite Points: 62

Average FPs/cache: 1.9

 

Most FPs:

GC4PHGE	PE series #10: You've completed the "P":	  17 FPs
GC4PJ5P	PE Series #20: End of the E:	                  15 FPs
GC5B1B6	Love PE Series 1:	                          11 FPs
GC4PQ6N	PE series #9: A couple of distinguished gentlemen: 4 FPs
GC4PJ1P	PE Series #12: I am Mad about these puzzles:	   3 FPs

Cachers with the most Love PE and PE GeoArt finds:

Alfie & Nella: 32		
ChrisDen:      32		
erenei:	       32		
George c12:    32		
iPajero:       32		
Kingrobert:    32		
Kitchen boss:  32		
Mixs:	       32		
NaviMate:      32		
PumTim:	       32		
Riisearch:     32		
simplr:	       32		
Wikkelgat:     32	

(To be fair, I added own caches to the owners' finds.)

 

50 cachers have logged finds on this series.

Average no. of finds/cacher: 18.9

Share this post


Link to post

Statistics for the Respect the Locals GeoArt series:

 

Respect the Locals GeoArt is a series of 20 mystery caches in the form of a whale, in the town of Hermanus.

These caches have been placed by Suikerbossies between 4 November 2013 and 30 April 2014. They are currently all findable.

 

Respect%20the%20Locals.jpg

 

Total number of finds: 623

Average finds/cache: 31.2

Most finds: 38 (GC4X25W Respect the Locals #1: Spit or Swallow)

Fewest finds: 24 (GC4X9V3 Respect the Locals #12: Fernkloof)

Most DNFs: 4 (GC4X400 Respect the Locals #8: Those Romans)

Most notes: 3 (GC4X400 Respect the Locals #8: Those Romans)

Total number of Favourite Points: 72

Average FPs/cache: 3.6

 

Most FPs:

1. GC4Z9YK  Respect the Locals #17: Slow and Steady:   13 FPs
2. GC4Z8PC  Respect the Locals #4: VOS:	               11 FPs
3. GC4RD58  Respect the Locals #20: Fairy Tale Ending:  6 FPs
4. GC4X25W  Respect the Locals #1: Spit or Swallow:	5 FPs
  GC4Z8AC  Respect the Locals #2: Coastal Garden:	5 FPs

Cachers with the most Respect the Locals finds:

Boer&Brit:	       20
Cabey:	               20
Carey&Jason:	       20
ChrisDen:	       20
Henzz:	               20
PieterM:	       20
RolandC:	       20
SKATTIE@1:	       20
SummitCache:	       20
The Huskies:	       20
Tricky Vicky & Mickey: 20
cownchicken:	       20
groenies:	       20
lostwings:	       20
terunkie:	       20
tomtwogates:	       20

45 cachers have logged finds on this series.

Average no. of finds/cacher: 13.8

Share this post


Link to post

Statistics for Scubie's 2 province 20 cache dash:

 

This is a series of 20 caches, west of Pretoria.

These caches have been placed by scubie999 on 9 May 2015. They are currently all findable.

 

Scubies%202%20province.jpg

 

Total number of finds: 471

Average finds/cache: 23.6

Most finds: 29 (GC5V4E8 Scubie's 2 province 20 cache dash 16/20 - 16)

Fewest finds: 20 (GC5V4CT Scubie's 2 province 20 cache dash 7/20 - 123)

Most DNFs: 3 (GC5V4DE Scubie's 2 province 20 cache dash 12/20 - Tree)

Most notes: 2 (GC5V4F3 Scubie's 2 province 20 cache dash 20/20 - Wall)

Total number of Favourite Points: 1 (GC5V4F3 Scubie's 2 province 20 cache dash 20/20 - Wall)

Average FPs/cache: 0.05

 

Cachers with the most finds on this series:

AdieA:	           20
Cherokee.za:	   20
ClodsM:	           20
HeinG:	           20
JanMich:	   20
K.T.C.:	           20
Leon St:	   20
Louise_Gerhard:	   20
SpiderFinder:	   20
Tartan_Terror:	   20
Team Venter:	   20
Wilduvo:	   20
cache is king :  20
calvin01:	   20
foraginghedgehogs: 20
mart514:	   20
pannie&medusae:	   20
rodnjoan: 	   20

36 cachers have logged finds on this series.

Average no. of finds/cacher: 13.1

Share this post


Link to post

Statistics for P&M's 50 Cache Dash:

 

P&M's 50 Cache Dash is a series of 50 caches to the southwest of Pretoria.

These caches have been placed by pannie&medusae between 4 and 7 July 2012. 47 of them are currently findable.

 

PampM.jpg

 

Total number of finds: 6691

Average finds/cache: 133.8

Most finds: 152 (GC3JYN2 P&M's 50 Cache Dash #3: Rietvlei View)

Fewest finds: 102 (GC3PCJ5 P&M's 50 Cache Dash #38: Bashewa)

Most DNFs: 13 (GC3PC8N P&M's 50 Cache Dash #30: Tree Line)

Most notes: 5 (GC3PCJ5 P&M's 50 Cache Dash #38: Bashewa)

Total number of Favourite Points: 104

Average FPs/cache: 2.1

 

Most FPs:

1. GC3P0AF  P&M's 50 Cache Dash #15: Keep Out!	            34 FPs
2. GC3K0H8  P&M's 50 Cache Dash #6: Dean There, Done That!  20 FPs
3. GC3PCHE  P&M's 50 Cache Dash #37: Isolated Windpump	    15 FPs
4. GC3HZVQ  P&M's 50 Cache Dash #4: On The Blink	    12 FPs
5. GC3PCZE  P&M's 50 Cache Dash #48: Steel Deal	             8 FPs

40 cachers have found all 50 caches.

253 cachers have logged finds on this series.

Average no. of finds/cacher: 26.4

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Danie,

Thanks for the awesome stats! It's very interesting to look at GeoCaching from the angle of numbers and time.

Do you have any more stats for the Fuzzy Matrix? I'd we interested to see the following;

1. Who has completed all 81 D/T combinations. (You have this one already).

2. For those who have, the time to complete from 1st to 81st cache.

3. For those who have, the number of caches taken to complete all 81 combinations.

4. D/T combination with the fewest available caches that can be found.

Keep up the great work.

cheers

John (TroopScouter)

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Danie - I have also heard of the Parow Arrow geoart? And then there were a few Power trails north of durban - but most got archived?

Share this post


Link to post

4. D/T combination with the fewest available caches that can be found.

The complete Difficulty/Terrain matrix for South Africa (active caches):

 

RSA%20D_T.jpg

The scarcest D/T combination in South Africa is 4.5/5, of which there is currently only 6 active caches

Share this post


Link to post

I have also heard of the Parow Arrow geoart?

Statistics for Arrow van Parow GeoArt:

This is a series of 11 mystery caches, in the form of an arrow, about 8km east of Melkbosstrand.

These caches have been placed by PieterM between 15 December 2014 and 6 February 2015. They are currently all findable.

 

Parow%20Arrow.jpg

 

Total number of finds: 57

Average finds/cache: 5.2

Most finds: 9 (GC5MCWY Behold, the mind is everything !)

Fewest finds: 2 (GC5MCX1 Arrow van Parow.)

Most notes: 2 (GC5KPFG Watch this space.)

Total number of Favourite Points: 1 (GC5MCX1 Arrow van Parow.)

Average FPs/cache: 0.09

 

Cachers with the most finds on this series:

1. cownchicken:	  11
  terunkie:	  11
3. The Huskies:	   7
4. Evolutionaries: 6
  SKATTIE@1:	   6

9 cachers have logged finds on this series.

Average no. of finds/cacher: 6.3

Share this post


Link to post

Most cache maintenance logs:

 

Before I calculate the answer, who would you say does the most cache maintenance?

In my area (Pretoria), based on the never-ending stream of maintenance logs I receive, I think Leon St must definitely be a candidate.

Share this post


Link to post

Now this would be a good stat to monitor!

Maybe this is something that the organisers/reviewers/Province Groups can look at to reward these hard workers! They are the ones that keep this game going for all of us! :lol:

 

Will be interesting!

 

Most cache maintenance logs:

 

Before I calculate the answer, who would you say does the most cache maintenance?

In my area (Pretoria), based on the never-ending stream of maintenance logs I receive, I think Leon St must definitely be a candidate.

Share this post


Link to post

Most cache maintenance logs:

 

Before I calculate the answer, who would you say does the most cache maintenance?

In my area (Pretoria), based on the never-ending stream of maintenance logs I receive, I think Leon St must definitely be a candidate.

 

Hmmm. Interesting question. But a few other factors which contribute to maintenance are worth considering (and not really quantifiable).

 

I have found that here in KZN that maintenance requirements are mainly influenced by the following:

 

Location

 

Caches in nature reserves always require far less maintenance than urban park 'n grabs

 

Container

 

A good container (preform or lock 'n lock) will keep contents dry - therefore no pulped logsheets to replace in pill containers, lozenge tubes and film canisters.

 

Placer experience

 

Newbies have not yet learned the nuances of hiding and waterproofing, so a higher proportion of their first placements are maintenance intensive. (It certainly applied to me!)

Share this post


Link to post

Most cache maintenance logs:

 

Before I calculate the answer, who would you say does the most cache maintenance?

In my area (Pretoria), based on the never-ending stream of maintenance logs I receive, I think Leon St must definitely be a candidate.

 

IMHO this is another one of those "how long is a piece of string" type of questions. If you are going to measure purely on the "Owner Maintenance" logs then you can make a comparison. I own many caches but only log an "Owner Maintenance" log when I have done the maintenance and need to get rid of the dreaded "red spanner"! I often do maintenance on a cache and do not log that I have done so as there is no red spanner. If I replace a logbook, or repair/renew a container, etc it is not necessary to log the fact. However, if I have received a note in a log that a cache might be missing and I have done maintenance then I will log it [even though there is no red spanner] to show cachers who may have read that the cache is missing, that it has been replaced.

 

I await your stats on this one but I'm sure there might be CO's who do a lot of maintenance who might not be on your list!

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for all the great Geoart stats! There is however one missing, the ? Geoart over Waterkloof Airforce Base - GC4GV7Q.

 

Updated table for geoart

 

11705121_10153466540988428_4601207839750777837_n.jpg?oh=28d5de73cdff9c3f5a27edf94b1fce68&oe=561A2675

 

Great to have a table with everything together. I'm just wondering why the other series are together with the Geoart? Is this just for convenience? I for one definitely see a BIG difference between Geoart and power trails (At least for the two GP geoart series in comparison to P&Ms series and the GPS trail) :) .

Share this post


Link to post

Yep - for convenience.

 

Please put forward names and ;locations of the other series/geoart.

 

I'm sure Danie will do his magic on them - and I can add to the table.

 

Suggestions are welsomed

Share this post


Link to post

Another interesting set of stats from the provinces:

 

Favouritie Points awarded (per Province) - as of 14 July 2015:

 


  •  
  • #1 Western Cape 9859 (31.9% of total for SA)
  • #2 Gauteng 8326 (27.0%)
  • #3 KwaZulu Natal 4907 (15.9%)
  • #4 Eastern Cape 3372 (10.9%)
  • #5 Mpumalanga 1516 (4.9%)
  • #6 Free State 1484 (4.8%)
  • #7 North West 755 (2.5%)
  • #8 Limpopo 331 (1.1%)
  • #9 Northern Cape (324 (1.0%)

Share this post


Link to post

Looking across the continent (Southern Africa and selected others):

 


  •  
  • Angola 23
  • Botswana 123
  • Burundi 0
  • Cameroon 15
  • Congo 4
  • Cote d'Iv 3
  • DRCongo 5
  • Egypt 1577
  • Eq Guinea 6
  • Ethiopia 46
  • Ghana 8
  • Kenya 250
  • Lesotho 130
  • Madagascar 17
  • Malawi 12
  • Mauritius 448
  • Morocco 1034
  • Mozambique 30
  • Namibia 1020
  • Nigeria 18
  • Reunion 352
  • Rwanda 10
  • S Africa 30874
  • Seychelles 355
  • Swaziland 131
  • Tanzania 672
  • Uganda 76
  • Zambia 77
  • Zimbabwe 189

Share this post


Link to post

Here is another stat that was surprising - there are not a huge number of cachers with lots of hides!!!!I really thought we had more cachers that have hidden more than 100 caches!

 

Also - a few of these teams have a number of caches in other countries (e.g. Carbon Hunter, SawaSawa, cincol, Crystal Fairy)

 

  • Louwtjie & Vroutjie 357
  • Technonut 300
  • Cincol 288
  • SawaSawa 275
  • Fish Eagle 263
  • Wazat 229
  • GEO936 223
  • PieterM 209
  • Crystal Fairy 208
  • LeoSt 196
  • iPajero 195
  • NotBlonde 159
  • HeinG 152
  • paddawan 141
  • Carbon Hunter 134
  • weeman078 133
  • Louise_gerhard 119
  • SKATTIE@1 117
  • dakardrix 116
  • Noddy 110
  • Wh00 106
  • cache-fan 103
  • pannie&medusa 103
  • Cism 103

Edited by Carbon Hunter

Share this post


Link to post

Here is another stat that was surprising - there are not a huge number of cachers with lots of hides!!!!I really thought we had more cachers that have hidden more than 100 caches!

The problem with this many caches is that it becomes a big and never-ending maintenance chore - I definitely don't want to maintain 357 caches!

Share this post


Link to post

Here is another stat that was surprising - there are not a huge number of cachers with lots of hides!!!!I really thought we had more cachers that have hidden more than 100 caches!

The problem with this many caches is that it becomes a big and never-ending maintenance chore - I definitely don't want to maintain 357 caches!

 

I don't necessarily agree with that - It depends on what containers you are using and where you are placing them.

 

Most of my caches are in nature reserves, and are good LnL or preform containers. That keeps the logsheets dry, and the locations are usually free of the "thieving" muggle problem. I only have two maintenance issues at the moment - one is waiting on the completion of roadworks (2nd stage of a multi - but the final is safe and sound), and the other will probably get archived, even though I have a spare container for it - it just gets too few finds.

 

I do maintenance about once a month and it is less than half a day's work. :D

Share this post


Link to post

Most maintenance logs:

 

The following cachers have logged the most owner maintenance logs on their South African caches. One should be careful not to draw the wrong conclusions - as cincol has mentioned, all owners don't log all their maintenance, and more logs don't always imply better maintenance.

1. Louwtjie&Vroutjie:	   645	maintenance logs  (6.0% of the total)
2. Leon St:	           358	maintenance logs  (3.3% of the total)
3. TechnoNut:	           250	maintenance logs  (2.3% of the total)
4. Fish Eagle:	           212	maintenance logs  (2.0% of the total)
5. pannie&medusae	   191	maintenance logs  (1.8% of the total)
6. Tricky Vicky & Mickey: 163	maintenance logs  (1.5% of the total)
7. Wazat:	           153	maintenance logs  (1.4% of the total)
8. hennieventer:	   150	maintenance logs  (1.4% of the total)
9. iPajero:	           144	maintenance logs  (1.3% of the total)
10. NotBlonde:	           136	maintenance logs  (1.3% of the total)

Share this post


Link to post

Here is another stat that was surprising - there are not a huge number of cachers with lots of hides!!!!I really thought we had more cachers that have hidden more than 100 caches!

 

Also - a few of these teams have a number of caches in other countries (e.g. Carbon Hunter, SawaSawa, cincol, Crystal Fairy)

 

  • Louwtjie & Vroutjie 357
  • Technonut 300
  • Cincol 288
  • SawaSawa 275
  • Fish Eagle 263
  • Wazat 229
  • GEO936 223
  • PieterM 209
  • Crystal Fairy 208
  • LeoSt 196
  • iPajero 195
  • NotBlonde 159
  • HeinG 152
  • paddawan 141
  • Carbon Hunter 134
  • weeman078 133
  • Louise_gerhard 119
  • SKATTIE@1 117
  • dakardrix 116
  • Noddy 110
  • Wh00 106
  • cache-fan 103
  • pannie&medusa 103
  • Cism 103

 

Most maintenance logs:

 

The following cachers have logged the most owner maintenance logs on their South African caches. One should be careful not to draw the wrong conclusions - as cincol has mentioned, all owners don't log all their maintenance, and more logs don't always imply better maintenance.

1. Louwtjie&Vroutjie:	   645	maintenance logs  (6.0% of the total)
2. Leon St:	           358	maintenance logs  (3.3% of the total)
3. TechnoNut:	           250	maintenance logs  (2.3% of the total)
4. Fish Eagle:	           212	maintenance logs  (2.0% of the total)
5. pannie&medusae	   191	maintenance logs  (1.8% of the total)
6. Tricky Vicky & Mickey: 163	maintenance logs  (1.5% of the total)
7. Wazat:	           153	maintenance logs  (1.4% of the total)
8. hennieventer:	   150	maintenance logs  (1.4% of the total)
9. iPajero:	           144	maintenance logs  (1.3% of the total)
10. NotBlonde:	           136	maintenance logs  (1.3% of the total)

These 2 stats seems to go hand in hand - more caches - more maintenance.

 

another factor to remember - is that one normally oly places a "Owner Maintenance" log if there was a "Needs Maintenance" log posted - not for normal run of the mill maintenance that happens anyway.

Edited by Carbon Hunter

Share this post


Link to post

Correlation among cache properties:

 

I calculated the correlation among the following quantifiable cache properties, for all South African caches:

  • Difficulty rating
  • Terrain rating
  • Archived or not
  • Container size
  • Premium or not
  • Number of Favourite Points
  • Number of Finds
  • Number of DNFs
  • Number of Notes
  • Number of Will Attend logs
  • Number of Attended logs
  • Number of Needs Maintenance logs
  • Number of Owner Maintenance logs
  • Number of Needs Archived logs
  • Number of Update Coordinates logs
  • Number of Temporarily Disable Listing logs
  • Number of Archive logs
  • Number of Enable Listing logs
  • Number of Unarchive Listing logs
  • Number of Post Reviewer Notes

Correlation is a statistical measure of how well two properties follow each other. Perfect correlation (1) means as the first goes up, the second goes up as well. Correlation of 0 means the two properties are independent. Correlation of -1 means as the one goes up, the other goes down.

 

My next few postings will be about the more interesting correlations that I found.

Edited by Danie Viljoen

Share this post


Link to post

Difficulty rating correlations:

 

Let's start with an interesting one. Difficulty shows a particularly strong correlation with the Terrain rating (correlation = 0.37). What this means is that higher Difficulty is quite strongly associated with high Terrain rating. Or to put it differently, if you know the Terrain, you can guess the Difficulty fairly well.

 

As I understand Difficulty and Terrain (and I would like other opinions on this), these two should actually be independent; the one has nothing to do with the other. Difficulty of 5 should mean the cache is hidden extremely well, or the puzzle is very difficult. Terrain = 5 means it is up on a high mountain or tree. What one sees is that cache hiders exaggerate the Difficulty rating for caches with high Terrain ratings. A real 5/5 cache in my opinion should literally be a needle in a haystack on a high mountain (or a nano in one of those enormous snake-infested bird nests in a high tree in the Northern Cape!)

 

I actually expected a negative correlation between Difficulty and Terrain. Nobody hides a cache on a mountain peak in such a way that nobody can find it, and conversely, if I hide a cache in the city (where the terrain is easy), I tend to put in an effort to make it a challenge to find it.

 

Other correlations: As expected there is some correlation with the number of Favourite Points - more difficult caches tend to collect more FPs.

There is also a (weak) correlation with container size - probably because bigger containers are safer in more difficult places.

There is a weak negative correlation with the number of finds - higher Difficulty implies fewer finds (not unexpected).

Lastly there is no correlation with the number of DNFs, which surprised me a bit. I expected more DNFs with higher Difficulty. I suspect it does not show because very few cachers log a DNF if they can not solve a difficult puzzle.

Edited by Danie Viljoen

Share this post


Link to post

Terrain rating correlations:

 

Terrain is most strongly correlated with Difficulty, but that I discussed yesterday. It is also correlated with Container size. I assume higher Terrain ratings imply safer hiding places for larger containers. There is also weak correlation with the number of Favourite points - we tend to like the caches we need to work for!

 

Negative correlations:

The number of Finds goes down with higher Terrain ratings.

Two interesting ones: Caches with higher Terrain ratings tend to have lower Archived probability and also have fewer DNFs. I suspect the Archived probability is lower because the probability for muggling is lower for higher Terrain ratings (and that indirectly affects the number of DNFs.) I did not specifically check for survival rate, but it appears to imply that caches with higher Terrain ratings may last longer. (It feels logical, but I'll investigate this later.)

Share this post


Link to post

Not directly stat related - but keeping all SA Challenge caches on record (thanks to TechnoNut)

 

ChallengeSummary1024.jpg

Edited by Carbon Hunter

Share this post


Link to post

keeping all SA Challenge caches on record (thanks to TechnoNut)

Good to have it all in one place. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post

Archived correlations:

 

Whether a cache is archived or not, is most strongly correlated with its number of temporarily disabled logs. Having at least one of these logs is a strong indication that a cache is not going to last very long.

The Archived status is also correlated with Attended and Will Attend logs, which makes sense, because events do all get archived.

 

Negative correlations:

Number of finds: Archived caches tend to have fewer finds, which makes sense.

Difficulty and Terrain rating: The higher the Difficulty or Terrain, the lower the probability that a cache will be archived

Favourite Points: Archived caches have fewer FPs.

 

The one surprise to me was that there is no correlation with the number of DNFs - I expected caches with lots of DNFs to have a higher probability to get archived, but the numbers don't agree.

Share this post


Link to post

Container size correlations:

 

As mentioned before, there is correlation with both Terrain and Difficulty - bigger sized containers tend to have higher Difficulty and Terrain ratings.

Bigger containers get more Favorite Points (I am guessing because of the stash or the views associated with higher terrain ratings)

An interesting one - bigger containers are also associated with more note logs. I suspect this may have something to do with travel bug logs.

 

Negative correlations:

One I can't explain - bigger containers have fewer Publish logs than smaller ones. As far as I know all new caches have exactly one Publish log, so all I can think is that this must have a historic origin.

Bigger containers also get fewer DNFs, which is hardly surprising.

 

Neutral:

There is no significant correlation between container size and the number of owner maintenance logs or its archive status.

Share this post


Link to post

Premium cache correlations:

 

I expected premium caches to have fewer finds, less maintenance and lower archive probability than non-premium caches. To my surprise I found that there is no significant correlation with any of these properties, at least when one compares all premium caches with all the others countrywide. To reiterate: Premium caches do not have significantly fewer finds (I can't explain this!), less maintenance or lower archive probability than the rest. There is no correlation with Favourite Points either. Unless one wants/needs to see who looked at your cache listing, there is really no good reason to make a cache premium.

 

(I plan to zoom in on Premium caches again later; I want to compare their number of finds with their near non-premium neighbours.)

Share this post


Link to post

Premium cache correlations:

Unless one wants/needs to see who looked at your cache listing, there is really no good reason to make a cache premium.

 

 

?? I dont knwo about this feature?? Can someone elaborate please. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post

?? I dont knwo about this feature?? Can someone elaborate please. Thanks

 

Not sure if you're joking... B) but here goes...

 

If you look at any of your premium member only caches, just below the line that says "This is a Premium Member Only cache." there is a link that says: "Read the audit log (see who viewed your cache)". This gives you a list of all the premium members that have viewed your cache and how many times, plus first and last visit date/time.

Edited by scubie999

Share this post


Link to post

?? I dont knwo about this feature?? Can someone elaborate please. Thanks

I don't own any premium caches, so I can't check this, but I have heard that the owner of a premium cache gets some kind of identifying feedback whenever someone reads the cache listing. Maybe one of the premium cache owners can confirm this?

Share this post


Link to post

Unless one wants/needs to see who looked at your cache listing, there is really no good reason to make a cache premium.

 

Danie - my motivation (correct or incorrect) is that someone paying membership is "a more serious cacher" than those not paying membership. Personally I would like to avoid the fly-by-nighter's on a more sentimental/sensitive cache. Just my opinion. :)

Share this post


Link to post

...some kind of identifying feedback whenever someone reads the cache listing...

 

I own one and it is just in the form of an online log. Here is part of it:

 

fDn0pvb.png

Share this post


Link to post

?? I dont knwo about this feature?? Can someone elaborate please. Thanks

 

Not sure if you're joking... B) but here goes...

 

 

Nope - serious!!!! :rolleyes:

 

Well one learns something every day. I also have no Premium only caches. I always felt that SA is not such a major caching destination - so I'd like as many cachers as possible to find and enjoy my caches. Personal preference...

 

Thanks for your feedback - interesting to know.

Share this post


Link to post

Unless one wants/needs to see who looked at your cache listing, there is really no good reason to make a cache premium.

Danie - my motivation (correct or incorrect) is that someone paying membership is "a more serious cacher" than those not paying membership. Personally I would like to avoid the fly-by-nighter's on a more sentimental/sensitive cache. Just my opinion. :)

I don't care if a cache is premium or not; I am simply reporting what the numbers say. One of the (for me) interesting facts was that premium caches don't have fewer maintenance logs. In my opinion that disproves your sentimental/sensitive point - my conclusion is that premium members are NOT safer cache visitors, otherwise the Needs Maintenance and Owner Maintenance logs for premium caches would have been fewer.

 

The strange thing is that the numbers, on the whole, do not show that premium caches attract fewer finds than non-premium caches. I don't understand why, because as far as I know the non-premium cachers (the majority in South Africa) should not even be able to see the premium listings. Maybe this is not true if one looks in a smaller area and compare them only with nearby neighbours; I'll check later.

Share this post


Link to post

Very interesting to see the lack of correlations with Premium member caches. One thing that really bugs me with them is the audit logs. I discovered that feature by chance when viewing a new PM cache several times just after it was published. The CO emailed me and asked me if I planned on going for the FTF :laughing: .

 

Now I view all PM caches in GSAK so nobody can see how many times I've viewed the listing :anitongue: .

Edited by Delbadore

Share this post


Link to post

Favourite Point correlations:

 

FPs are most strongly correlated with the number of finds, and interestingly, the number of notes.

FPs also have a correlation with the Difficulty rating, but only a very weak correlation with the Terrain rating.

There is a weak correlation with Container size; bigger containers get slightly more FPs.

Lastly there is a weak negative correlation with Archive probability - caches with lots of FPs appear to have a better survival probability. (The reason could be quite different - caches that have been archived long ago may not have been active when the Favourite Points started. And maybe some cachers reallocate FPs from archived caches to active ones?)

Share this post


Link to post

Finds correlations:

 

Of all the correlations among the many cache properties, the one between the number of finds and the number of Needs Maintenance logs is one of the strongest. It is probably related to full log sheets.

There is also a very strong correlation with the number of DNFs, which I find somewhat surprising. The more the finds, the more the DNFs.

As mentioned before, the number of Favourite Points is also correlated with the number of finds.

 

Negative correlations:

Archive status: More finds are associated with a lower probability that a cache is archived

Terrain and Difficulty ratings: The higher the ratings, the fewer the finds.

 

Neutral: There is no correlation between the number of finds and the container size.

Share this post


Link to post

What about Favourite points to Cache type corrleation?

 

I am going to hazard a guess (hypothesise) that Earthcache type gets more FPs per find in general?

Share this post


Link to post

Danie, what about a seasonal comparison of caching activity? Do we slow down over Winter at all? Or has this been done already?

Share this post


Link to post

Danie, what about a seasonal comparison of caching activity? Do we slow down over Winter at all? Or has this been done already?

Yes, I have generated graphs of finds per day of the year from time to time. The last one was 22 June 2015 (the second set of graphs). I'll generate a multi-year one soon.

Share this post


Link to post

...finds per day of the year...

Finds per day excludes DNF's, I was wondering more on a general activity throughout a year compared to other years and while on the topic maybe per province.

 

It would be interesting to see if some area's activity picks up while others drop such as holiday seasons etc.

 

It also seems as if Pretoria cachers at the moment are less active than JHB cachers, and other than the weather, was wondering if my perception is correct and if so why...

Share this post


Link to post

Logs per day of the year:

 

I am not sure if this is what you want - I counted all Finds, DNFs and Attended logs for the period 2005-2015, and smoothed it to eliminate the weekend effect:

 

RSA%20Logs%20per%20day%20of%20the%20year%20-%202005-2015.jpg

It peaks on 29 December, and the lowest point is on 2 June.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 35

×
×
  • Create New...