Multicache

[+42at42]

I put together a very short multi. The first stage is on the way to the 2nd stage. All that is in the 1st stage is co-ords and a safety message to make sure people realize that the cache is safely accessible and there is no reason to be Superman or Spiderman to find the cache. I put a difficulty of 3 only because it is not a usual hide.

 

It has been up for a week and only one person has attempted it. I am debating whether or not to trust that people will read the safety warnings. Maybe I can change the name to include some of the safety issues.

 

GC1WVTW is the cache.

 

Any thoughts?

Edited August 14, 2009 by 42at42

[+Knight2000]

Sure they avoid them. Why get one smiley when you can get two? (I think that is what some people think.) We did avoid one last week but it was because it involved a 12 mile hike and we were not prepared!

 

What would you say? Expect about 1/3 of the visitors of a traditional?

[knowschad]

I put together a very short multi. The first stage is on the way to the 2nd stage. All that is in the 1st stage is co-ords and a safety message to make sure people realize that the cache is safely accessible and there is no reason to be Superman or Spiderman to find the cache. I put a difficulty of 3 only because it is not a usual hide.

 

It has been up for a week and only one person has attempted it. I am debating whether or not to trust that people will read the safety warnings. Maybe I can change the name to include some of the safety issues.

 

GC1WVTW is the cache.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Not sure what your real question is. If you want to know if people avoid them, I see that of your 88 finds, only 1 is a multi-cache, so that by itself should answer that part of the question.

 

The 1.5 terrain rating should tell any experienced cacher that they probably do not need to:

 

* GO NEAR WATER*

* CLIMB FENCE*

* CLIMB RAILING*

 

and beginners that might not have that sort of understanding are less likely to be caching without having read the cache page, so you're probably OK there, as well.

[+jhauser42]

I actually like the multi's even though I have not done many. Did a really nice 3-parter the other day that I enjoyed immensely. I also have part 2 coords for a couple more, but the area is far too wet for me to get to during my lunch hour in work clothes.

Well, I was about to say I would be more than happy to try it next time I am up in Canada, but you have archived it....

 

Joe

[+42at42]

I actually like the multi's even though I have not done many. Did a really nice 3-parter the other day that I enjoyed immensely. I also have part 2 coords for a couple more, but the area is far too wet for me to get to during my lunch hour in work clothes.

Well, I was about to say I would be more than happy to try it next time I am up in Canada, but you have archived it....

 

Joe

 

The main reason I archived it is to have it published as a traditional. I put some thought and effort into the final and wanted to see how everybody likes the hide.

[+TellMeIfYouSeeAChicken]

I like multis and respect the effort COs put into developing and maintaining them. That said, time is an issue in my life. There is almost never an occasion when I leave the house and don't have to be back by a certain time. So I'll only really consider doing a multi if the CO estimates how long it'll take and if the estimate is under a couple of hours. Daylong drive-to-the-next-town multis are going to have to wait till our kids are in college.

[+anakerose]

The only multis we have attempted have been in the general vicinity of our city. When we go on caching trips I avoid them because you never know how long they will take or how far you'll have to go. The only time I do them is if someone in the area recommends it.

[+StarBrand]

Avoid is a bit stong wording. In our case it is usually situational. If we will be out covering the ground for other caches or shopping or something - then we welcome well thought out multis. If we are on vacation and need to put 400 miles behind us then we do indeed avoid them for time's sake.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Any thoughts?

When traveling, I'll never get back if I don't complete it that day and having worked on some of these I now just avoid them.

 

Locally I'll do them after I find all the others first. The day when I actually could find all the others first has long since passed.

 

That means the only ones I'm going to do now are worth doing because they are a can't miss cache.

Edited August 13, 2009 by Renegade Knight

[+GrievousAngel]

I avoid multis that involve pointless counting of items in playgrounds or gathering of numbers from various spots around a boring location. (One local cache is almost entirely within a commuter parking lot and has cachers running from sign to sign, gathering numbers from bus routes and anti-loitering ordinances. The fun factor there would be close to zero for me.) On the other hand, if a multi leads cachers around an interesting area, maybe getting information from, say, places of historical interest or works of art, that multi would be an enjoyable experience. (Another local multi leads cachers around a park, asking them to identify trees at the posted locations. That was a fun one.) Cachers on numbers runs will probably avoid both the good and the bad multis, though.

[Mr.Yuck]

I actually like the multi's even though I have not done many. Did a really nice 3-parter the other day that I enjoyed immensely. I also have part 2 coords for a couple more, but the area is far too wet for me to get to during my lunch hour in work clothes.

Well, I was about to say I would be more than happy to try it next time I am up in Canada, but you have archived it....

 

Joe

 

The main reason I archived it is to have it published as a traditional. I put some thought and effort into the final and wanted to see how everybody likes the hide.

 

As a local (but American) whose been to Mountain Locks Park on several occasions, and found the two other caches listed in your cache description (as well as long gone archived caches in the park), I have to say I think you were a little quick on the trigger to archive it. Sure, it's not going to get as much traffic as Just for Ronald or Just for the King but it would have done fine, I'm sure. But I'll look into the reborn traditional in the future. Don't worry, I won't go over the fences. That canal stinks, and I'd never want to fall in.

 

I'm sure you'll get more than enough general input the "avoiding" question.

[+Puppy Dawg]

I enjoy complicated multis that have you in a beautiful area doing tough terrain. Like this.

[+WRASTRO]

I do not avoid multi or unknown cache type. About 10% of my finds are multi and another 10% unknowns. Although as RK mentioned, I do tend to not seek them when I am travelling.

[+Knight2000]

Not sure what your real question is. If you want to know if people avoid them, I see that of your 88 finds, only 1 is a multi-cache, so that by itself should answer that part of the question.

Except that the traditional ratio to multis isn't even close to even.

 

Since we do not take into account for smilies we get them as long as we have the time. (Usually that isn't much of a factor though.) The only thing I can think of that would keep us is the size. When the kids start to lose interest for the day we switch to only finding caches that have trade items.

 

...of course then there is the issue of people not rating the caches accurately. Too many micros that are rated smalls.

Edited August 13, 2009 by Knight2000

[+Knight2000]

Not sure what your real question is. If you want to know if people avoid them, I see that of your 88 finds, only 1 is a multi-cache, so that by itself should answer that part of the question.

This made me wonder.

 

Using the closest traditionals that were in the 500 PQ from my house I get a ratio of 1:46.9

 

Multi to traditional ratios for all of our traditional finds 1:41.3 So I feel my statement above was accurate. Totally didn't matter, but fun to think about. (The kind of numbers I like.)

 

Totally unscientific? Of course.

 

Anyway the OP's ratio of 1:87 really doesn't seem off. Maybe if it was 1:249...

 

Again. None of this mattered.

[knowschad]

Not sure what your real question is. If you want to know if people avoid them, I see that of your 88 finds, only 1 is a multi-cache, so that by itself should answer that part of the question.

This made me wonder.

 

Using the closest traditionals that were in the 500 PQ from my house I get a ratio of 1:46.9

 

Multi to traditional ratios for all of our traditional finds 1:41.3 So I feel my statement above was accurate. Totally didn't matter, but fun to think about. (The kind of numbers I like.)

 

Totally unscientific? Of course.

 

Anyway the OP's ratio of 1:87 really doesn't seem off. Maybe if it was 1:249...

 

Again. None of this mattered.

 

I think I see your point. Are you referring to the ratio of multi's vs regulars in any given area, and how that relates to the OP's find ratio of muti's vs regulars of 1:87? I guess that's a fair quesion. But there's nothing stopping a cacher from ignoring regulars and having 100% of their finds be multis, if that's what they prefererred, right?

[+Knight2000]

I think I see your point. Are you referring to the ratio of multi's vs regulars in any given area, and how that relates to the OP's find ratio of muti's vs regulars of 1:87? I guess that's a fair quesion. But there's nothing stopping a cacher from ignoring regulars and having 100% of their finds be multis, if that's what they prefererred, right?

I suppose so. I used mine just as a barometer for my local area. The OP area would differ I am sure.

 

You can get whatever caches you want. It didn't seem to me that his stats suggested he was intentionally skipping multis. (At least to me...)

[+Allanon]

Back to the original question...unless I'm out with someone that likes to do multi's, yes, I ignore them.

[+Knight2000]

Back to the original question...unless I'm out with someone that likes to do multi's, yes, I ignore them.

Why? The only reason I can think of is because of the smileys. I am curious.

[+uxorious]

Why? The only reason I can think of is because of the smileys. I am curious.

 

While the smileys probably do play a role in who looks for a multi, they are not the only reason.

 

I have very limited mobility, my knees are shot. I generally skip caches if I cannot get a fair idea if they are within my limit. There are a couple multis in my area that I have done the first part of, then discovered the finial is out of range, or my physical ability. I will have to try to return to them when I have my mobility scooter with me. (assuming of course I can even do them with it. )

 

Sometimes time is of the essence when we go looking for a cache. I think a lot of people who avoid them are concerned about the time they have allowed for the days caching. With a multi you cannot always tell how long it is going to take.

 

I like the concept of a multi, but have to take into consideration time and ability.

Edited August 14, 2009 by uxorious

[+grand-moff]

I am quite new to caching and at present only gone for traditionals. This is because i usually go out with my kids and as they are young 9,7 and 5 they would get bored if we didn't find a box but instead had to work out some puzzle or re-arange some figures. That said I have now done 49 caches and was thinking of doing a multi for for our 50th, but i will have to find an interesting and worthwhile one to keep the kids amused. Also if we are going to be searching for a while i will have to be sure its a good sized cache so my kids can make some good trades.

[+jdmed]

To add to your inquiry Knight2000 and 42at42 I avoid multi-caches for 2 reasons:

 

1.) As an iPhone Cacher 9 times out of 10 I'm caching on the fly so time is a factor, but also reading all the multi-cache information on the screen is not easy or comfortable. Even caches with helpful waypoint routes are tough.

 

2.) 9 times out of 10 I'm caching with my young kids, so too much focus req'd to multi-cache (them off course, not me, ahem!)

 

As an empirical aside, where I live in North Vancouver on the side of some big mountains, I've noticed the caches that are just a bit of a hike up the hill (30 min - 2hr.) have very low usage (some with just 6 logs in 2 years), while the traditional caches have the typical tons of logs. And this is a very athletic west coast city. My unscientific theory has been that the majority (not the people on this forum) of Geocachers must do it for easy quick fun, not a long hard challenge. And the serious hikers (a whole 'nother crowd) don't geocache that much. In fact I can basically see a 3 month old geocache out my window up Mt. Fromme that is a 2 hr. hike and still has no FTF. Gross generalizations I know, but for what is it worth in the discussion.

[+Knight2000]

I have very limited mobility, my knees are shot. I generally skip caches if I cannot get a fair idea if they are within my limit. There are a couple multis in my area that I have done the first part of, then discovered the finial is out of range, or my physical ability. I will have to try to return to them when I have my mobility scooter with me. (assuming of course I can even do them with it. )

 

Sometimes time is of the essence when we go looking for a cache. I think a lot of people who avoid them are concerned about the time they have allowed for the days caching. With a multi you cannot always tell how long it is going to take.

 

I like the concept of a multi, but have to take into consideration time and ability.

That is totally reasonable. I hadn't thought of that as I am younger.

 

To add to your inquiry Knight2000 and 42at42 I avoid multi-caches for 2 reasons:

 

1.) As an iPhone Cacher 9 times out of 10 I'm caching on the fly so time is a factor, but also reading all the multi-cache information on the screen is not easy or comfortable. Even caches with helpful waypoint routes are tough.

 

2.) 9 times out of 10 I'm caching with my young kids, so too much focus req'd to multi-cache (them off course, not me, ahem!)

 

As an empirical aside, where I live in North Vancouver on the side of some big mountains, I've noticed the caches that are just a bit of a hike up the hill (30 min - 2hr.) have very low usage (some with just 6 logs in 2 years), while the traditional caches have the typical tons of logs. And this is a very athletic west coast city. My unscientific theory has been that the majority (not the people on this forum) of Geocachers must do it for easy quick fun, not a long hard challenge. And the serious hikers (a whole 'nother crowd) don't geocache that much. In fact I can basically see a 3 month old geocache out my window up Mt. Fromme that is a 2 hr. hike and still has no FTF. Gross generalizations I know, but for what is it worth in the discussion.

Time doesn't have to be a factor. A multi cache can be as simple as finding two traditionals. I have one that takes 5 minutes of driving and 5 minutes of walking to the final which is a 50 cal ammo can. It has had like two finders in 2+ months while other ones in the same group of caches have 15+.

 

No all multis are like puzzles. Some multis are multiple traditionals tied together. (You just get one smiley for them.)

 

I would much rather find a cache that is rarely found than one with hundreds of logs. Go get that 2hr hike cache! My kids and I would be there! (11 and 7)

[AZcachemeister]

In general, I like them just fine.

But, sometimes the time is tight, and unless you have some idea of how long it will take, it gets put aside.

[+Taoiseach]

I actually find that I tend to avoid traditionals if I'm caching on my own!

 

That being said, I'm so often with a group of people who feel the need to grab all of the Traditionals in the area too...

 

Right now, I think that every lame traditional in an area just adds to my already huge backlog of finds that I haven't logged (GC.com has as still being in June or something like that...)

 

Besides that, I find Multis to be more fun - I find that the spirit of the hunt is more intact if I have to put a little bit of work into it.

[+Mar-elendili]

I like multis and always am ready to go for one. When travelling abroad and planning the caches, I always read the description very carefully, and only take it if it is less than an hour if I know there won't be much time for that. I also pay attention to the terrain/difficulty rating.

Same thing for mysteries, if I can solve them easily or at home, I will go for them on the terrain. This summer in Norway, I've found many mysteries that I enjoyed a lot, even if I had to spend 2 hours solving them first!

 

Multis at home don't scare me off. I like the increased "treasure hunt" feel they give. In fact, I've never placed a tradi yet... and I'd like to avoid it as long as I can, there are enough easy tradis around!

[+Rainbow Spirit]

To get the maximum number of finders to your multis I would suggest that you give a time and distance estimate to complete the cache.

I tend to like the difficult and adventurous caches, be they multis or otherwise, though I am happy to do almost any type of cache.

I wouldn't be put off by low find numbers at your multis etc, it just means that they are considered to be too hard for the average park and grab cacher, and the cachers that do go out of their way to find them are a more determined bunch!

[+42at42]

 

Not sure what your real question is. If you want to know if people avoid them, I see that of your 88 finds, only 1 is a multi-cache, so that by itself should answer that part of the question.

 

 

 

That multi I was able to do the first stage at home since I had a piture of the plaque that was used.

 

There are 2 other multis on my list that have been recomended. I have to put aside a couple of hours for each of them but I will get to them.

Edited August 14, 2009 by 42at42

[+ecanderson]

I put together a very short multi.

Like traditionals with high difficulty ratings, I will avoid a multi of unknown difficulty until I can commit serious time to it IF the owner doesn't give some clue about the number of stages and distances on the cache page. If I'm going out for a quick lunch cache, I won't tackle caches that will likely require more time than I can reasonably expect to devote to them.

 

In your case, you describe it as a "short" multi. Personally, I can't tell if that's the case since I'm not familiar with the area described on the cache page. But if we're talking about something that's 1/2 mile round trip, it's fair game for a lunch cache. Beyond that, you need to wait for a weekend when people have more time to devote to what could turn out to be longer caches. Geez, the thing was only UP for one weekend before you archived it. I'd have given it another weekend.

Edited August 14, 2009 by ecanderson

[+RobDJr]

I'm pretty much a geocaching omnivore. I'll tackle anything that comes my way. I don't do puzzles on the spur of the moment, preferring to solve them in advance. Multi's, if they're there I'll hit 'em. In general I prefer a good multi anyday over a park-n- ride lpc.

 

On the subject of time restrictions and doing a multi, the only time that comes into play with me is when travelling to areas I probably will not return to for a long time. In my local caching area, time is irrelevant because nobody ever said you absolutely must compete a multi in one trip. If I only have a short amount of time and the nearest cache is a multi, I might just snap off a stage and go on with my day.

[+power69]

One dnf along the way = no smilie.

[+RobDJr]

One dnf along the way = no smilie.

doesn't this apply to any cache, not just a multi?

[+Avernar]

One dnf along the way = no smilie.

doesn't this apply to any cache, not just a multi?

Yes but the odds of not getting the smilie go up with each additional stage.

 

Close to home I will do the multis. If I'm away from home then I tend to avoid multis unless they're a two stage or offset cache. I do however tend to grab the first stage when I'm nearby as I might be walking by the other stages when hunting more traditionals.

[+WebChimp]

It has been up for a week and only one person has attempted it.....

Any thoughts?

 

Yes.

 

Anything that is not a one-stage, traditional cache, with a rating greater than 2/2, will be found less often than a park and grab hide.

 

I have a few park and grab hides, and they are found on a regular basis. My puzzle caches are found with much less frequency. Some are found only three of our times a year.

 

That's the nature of a lot of caching activity. Why spend an hour on one smiley, when five easy ones can be found in the same time frame? That is a common, and understandable, approach.

 

If your joy in hiding a cache comes from seeing how many people log it, do the park and grabs. You will be happy.

 

If your joy comes from reading logs with lots of content, and you enjoy putting the puzzle together, do puzzles or mystery caches as your hides.

 

Isn't geocaching a grand hobby? No matter what you like it's there, and waiting to happen. There are enough hides of various types, and cachers of various tastes, that everyone can find something that makes them happy. Happy is good.

[+nelson crew]

Multis just take more time and effort. Not to say they are avoided per se, but often a multi must be the point of a whole trip, instead of being grabbed while in the area.

 

Personally, I think traditionals are like Skittles. Tasty and quick, but sometimes you want something a little more substantive. We've made an effort to grab every non-traditional cache in my area. Almost done with the puzzles, letterbox-hybrids, virtuals and earthcaches; multis are next on the list (we have a huge one planned for after work today). We don't get nearly as many in a trip, but honestly, once we past 1000 finds we stopped caring about the numbers.

[+Rustynails]

Multis just take more time and effort. Not to say they are avoided per se, but often a multi must be the point of a whole trip, instead of being grabbed while in the area.

 

Personally, I think traditionals are like Skittles. Tasty and quick, but sometimes you want something a little more substantive. We've made an effort to grab every non-traditional cache in my area. Almost done with the puzzles, letterbox-hybrids, virtuals and earthcaches; multis are next on the list (we have a huge one planned for after work today). We don't get nearly as many in a trip, but honestly, once we past 1000 finds we stopped caring about the numbers.

 

For all those who are crying about not enough time. YOU DON"T HAVE TO GET ALL STAGES THE SAME DAY. Be PATIENT and take your time and have fun. Life is to short.

 

Now for the attacks.

[knowschad]

One dnf along the way = no smilie.

doesn't this apply to any cache, not just a multi?

 

Sure, but you can have a lot more invested in a multi before you discover that you can't get any further.

[+nelson crew]

 

For all those who are crying about not enough time. YOU DON"T HAVE TO GET ALL STAGES THE SAME DAY. Be PATIENT and take your time and have fun. Life is to short.

 

Now for the attacks.

 

Now for the attacks? Your post was the closest to it. Stating that going after a multi is a different experience then numbers-running traditionals isn't crying about anything. It's a statement of perspective.

 

What's the deal with these forums? This isn't the first time I've made a general statement and been told I'm crying about something. The only angst in here is yours.

 

By the way, if you read the entire post you quoted, you'll see that you're just agreeing with me anyways. Sheesh.

[knowschad]

 

For all those who are crying about not enough time. YOU DON"T HAVE TO GET ALL STAGES THE SAME DAY. Be PATIENT and take your time and have fun. Life is to short.

 

Now for the attacks.

 

Hi, Rusty. No attack here. But what you say totally depends on how close to home it is. Even for me to get to your Beatles multi would take me a drive of 17 miles... about 25 minutes, according to Google. And much of my caching is done considerably farther away than that these days.

[+uxorious]

For all those who are crying about not enough time. YOU DON"T HAVE TO GET ALL STAGES THE SAME DAY. Be PATIENT and take your time and have fun. Life is to short.

 

Don't be such a snob. People are not CRYING about not enough time. They are making a statement, that fits their caching time and experience.

 

True you don't have to get all the stages the same day. However, if you are driving an hour or so to grab a few caches in a new area, you probably don't want to drive back later if you find there is some reason you can't finish the hunt in the same day.

 

Just because Multis work for you doesn't mean they are right for everyone. To imply that anyone who doesn't cache the way you do is "crying" is very self centered.

 

I would agree with the above quote, if you were to leave the implied insult out of it.

[+Rustynails]

 

For all those who are crying about not enough time. YOU DON"T HAVE TO GET ALL STAGES THE SAME DAY. Be PATIENT and take your time and have fun. Life is to short.

 

Now for the attacks.

 

Hi, Rusty. No attack here. But what you say totally depends on how close to home it is. Even for me to get to your Beatles multi would take me a drive of 17 miles... about 25 minutes, according to Google. And much of my caching is done considerably farther away than that these days.

 

Thanks, That's why I incuded that a hike is needed on my Beatles cache page. This way people can plan for it.

[+Steve&GeoCarolyn]

I love multis but we don't do many of them because we can't predict easily how much time we need to set aside or whether we will need special equipment. Often we don't know whether there are 2 or 200 stages. I get especially frustrated when I discover a multi-cache with more than three stages because it means that I should have brought a notebook to record data and didn't. So I want to be warned.

 

Here is our very favorite multi and one of our favorite caches of all time:

 

Six Sicks Icks GCWD3A

 

From the cache page:

Stage one will take you into a beautiful cypress swamp. Walk slowly and quietly for the best experience. At the hide location, relax a while and let the wildlife accept your presence. You may be pleasantly surprised by what you see.

 

Near Stage 1 is a certain and identifiable Bald Cypress (taxodium distichum) that is due west of stage 2. Not that it helps much, but it could be a good check of your coordinates if used just right.

 

Stage two may be completely inaccessible at times due to the forces of nature. Enjoy!

 

One thing that we liked about it was that it was so clear about what to expect and yet was still a difficult one to puzzle out. And it is in a beautlful location. Here's stage 1:

 

 

We DNFed this one the first time we tried it because we thought we had the wrong route on Stage 2. It turned out that we'd encountered forces of nature that made it inaccessible. But we were warned so we went back the next week and handily found it.

 

In addition to the excellent information on the cache page and the warnings, it has a fun theme which made the log a lot of fun to write. To me, this is what a multi-cache should look like: well-described, fun, mysterious, mentally challenging, fun to write about, and featuring a nice walk in beautiful surroundings. If I ever create a multicache, this cache will be the one that I check my own against.

 

Carolyn

[Skippermark]

It depends on the cache.

 

I like multis that are well laid out and leave you wanting to find the next stage. Those that take you a specific way, like up a certain trail or ones that have "cool" stages. Things like that.

 

I don't like multis that are multis just for the sake of putting out a multi where someone is like "Okay, let's put a container here" and then 1/4 mile away put another one of the same exact type without any creativity in the hide and so on until you get to the final a mile away.

 

I also don't like to do multis that are out by themselves with nothing else around unless there's something special about them and especially if they don't have a view or anything.

 

If someone is going to have you walk through the woods, and has nothing special planned, I'd rather they put out 5 traditionals 1/4 mile apart than one multi with the stages 1/4 mile apart.

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

The main reason I archived it is to have it published as a traditional. I put some thought and effort into the final and wanted to see how everybody likes the hide.

 

... I have to say I think you were a little quick on the trigger to archive it.

 

I agree...too quick to archive, especially less than a week after publication. Now you have ten traditional caches and no multis. I think if you had more patience you would have realized that a little variety is nice and people would still have enjoyed your multi. Numbers aren't everything.

[knowschad]

 

For all those who are crying about not enough time. YOU DON"T HAVE TO GET ALL STAGES THE SAME DAY. Be PATIENT and take your time and have fun. Life is to short.

 

Now for the attacks.

 

Hi, Rusty. No attack here. But what you say totally depends on how close to home it is. Even for me to get to your Beatles multi would take me a drive of 17 miles... about 25 minutes, according to Google. And much of my caching is done considerably farther away than that these days.

 

Thanks, That's why I incuded that a hike is needed on my Beatles cache page. This way people can plan for it.

 

Yes, but your point was that there is no need to get all stages the same day. My 34 mile round trip then turns into a 68 mile round trip. For that, I want some smileys!!

[+Harry Dolphin]

10% of my finds are multis. If it's in my normal caching area (Most of North Jersey plus parts of New York and Pennsylvania) I'll probably give it a try. I did one with 32 steps that took three trips over three months. I did another with 9 stages that took multiple trips over 8 months! Both definitely worth the effort.

(At least for me. Your enjoyment level may vary.) The 5/3 with 9 stages has had 8 finds in a year and a half...

While travelling, I'll usually avoid multis, unless I know they are going to cover a short distance. But you need some variety even while travelling. Enjoyed a 1.5/1 380 miles to the south. And a 2/2 475 miles northeast in Canada! Not to mention several while visting my sister in Maine.

I'm not the most prolific numbers cacher. I'm out there to have fun.

True. Multis will not get as many finds as a traditional.