New World Record - 413 geocache finds in ONE day

[Skippermark]

Can I get a couple seconds credit per cache for leaving the jeep doors open?

Your Jeep had doors on it? Imagine how many you could have gotten if you used a Wrangler and took the top & doors off. People could have been ready to jump out the instant they got close to the cache, and you probably wouldn't have had to stop...just keep rolling slowly and they jump in while on the run.

 

Next trip we will put Team Cotati in the trunk with the camera......now, where should we go next?

I would advise against this. I've done some calculations and the extra weight added by having Cotai and his equipment in the trunk will add a couple seconds accelerating up to speed, and with the added weight, you'll have to start slowing down sooner, which will further decrease your performance and ultimately the number of finds per hour.

 

However, I just reworked the numbers and having him in the trunk could actually help performance, especially on slippery surfaces by increasing traction from the added weight, especially if you get a car with some serious horsepower.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Congrats on the fun day you had!

 

I'll hesitate to call it the world record simply because of the fact that's there's no established way to actually qualify for such a feat. They way you did it would certainly be along the lines of the right way to go about it tho, at least IMHO.

 

For those who think it's not possible: I know of one run that had 99 finds in @3:45. Those were, if anything, even easier to find/log but not by much I'd bet.

[+Team Cotati]

Congrats on the fun day you had!

 

I'll hesitate to call it the world record simply because of the fact that's there's no established way to actually qualify for such a feat. They way you did it would certainly be along the lines of the right way to go about it tho, at least IMHO.

 

For those who think it's not possible: I know of one run that had 99 finds in @3:45. Those were, if anything, even easier to find/log but not by much I'd bet.

 

Possibly the World Record for most finds in under 4 hours.

 

Waiting for that to be certified.

 

Are there any 'qualifiers' that we need to properly categorize this potential World Record?

Edited September 9, 2009 by Team Cotati

[+sbell111]

I once found 19 caches on my lunch hour, alone, in a suit, using the 'next nearest' method. 413 in 24 hours is certainly doable.

[+Team Cotati]

I once found 19 caches on my lunch hour, alone, in a suit, using the 'next nearest' method. 413 in 24 hours is certainly doable.

 

Well there you have it. Yet another candidate for a World Record cache run.

 

Reminds me of Sir Edmund Hillary and his climbing of Mt. Everest.

 

Once he proved that it was possible, seems as though they came crawling out of the woodwork to climb that thing. These days, it hardly makes the news, unless someone gets killed in the process.

 

I sense many many World Record setting cache runs in the offing now that so many are proving the doability of such monumental feats of daring do.

 

Just be careful out there, we don't want to hear your name on the 6 'o clock news. Unless of course, it is about you signing the record book and claiming your trophy.

Edited September 9, 2009 by Team Cotati

[+sbell111]

I once found 19 caches on my lunch hour, alone, in a suit, using the 'next nearest' method. 413 in 24 hours is certainly doable.

 

Well there you have it. Yet another candidate for a World Record cache run.

 

Reminds me of Sir Edmund Hillary and his climbing of Mt. Everest.

 

Once he proved that it was possible, seems as though they came crawling out of the woodwork to climb that thing. These days, it hardly makes the news, unless someone gets killed in the process.

 

I sense many many World Record setting cache runs in the offing now that so many are proving the doability of such monumental feats of daring do.

 

Just be careful out there, we don't want to hear your name on the 6 'o clock news. Unless of course, it is about you signing the record book and claming your trophy.

I have no idea what you are rabbling on about.

[+ecanderson]

If I have any doubts about the record it would have to be with bathroom breaks. I will probably get into trouble here, but one of the cachers is known for taking frequent bathroom stops.

Well, it would be easier if this person happened to be a male, but knowing the difference if physiology, odds don't favor it. Regardless, you have endless miles of options for "the perfect spot in the ditch" since there's rarely anyone out in the part of the world to observe. Nearest farm can be a mile away, and traffic is nearly nil. Of course, it helps to be caching with friends and not be too bashful -- there aren't more than a handful of bushes out there!

[+ecanderson]

How do people manage to find so many hiding spots in such flat terrain? Looks like nothing but soil, weeds and hydro poles. I'm not even seeing any decent size rocks to hide tupperware under.

*

You'll note in one photo above a post with a black and yellow natural gas pipeline sign at the top. There's an endless series of such markers for fiber optic cable and gas line out there. Odds are very high that should you stop at any of these markers within a very wide area, you'll find a 35mm film canister at the back side with a little stone on top (or not). That's what makes a run of this sort possible. You're not spending any time finding caches, you're just spending time running 10' to them and doing something with the log and running back, and moving on down the road. Edited September 9, 2009 by ecanderson

[+ventura_kids]

 

I'll hesitate to call it the world record simply because of the fact that's there's no established way to actually qualify for such a feat. They way you did it would certainly be along the lines of the right way to go about it tho, at least IMHO. ................... Are there any 'qualifiers' that we need to properly categorize this potential World Record?

 

We spent some effort determining the NON-cheating methods to use in order to make a true World Record.

Although there are many variations on the "most caches in a day" record, some are not very "clean".

Here is a summary of what we decided was NON-cheating.....

rule one - NO cheating (if you're not sure whether it's cheating or not....it probably is)

The rest of the rules just attempt to clean up all the previous methods of marginal practices we've heard of.

rule two- NO previous knowledge of the caches or the route. (this include running the route with a local cacher who has previously found some or all of the caches, and also includes PRE-running any part of the route....to see where to park or otherwise)

rule three - The team must stick together (no splitting up to grab two or more caches at the same time)

rule four - The team must log, sticker or stamp the logsheet of every cache (nano's can be just initials to save log space).

rule five - NO time outs (all time counts, including Law Enforcement Officer stops, gas stops, food stops, and restroom stops)

rule six - one day is one day (midnight to midnight)

Edited September 10, 2009 by ventura_kids

[+kd solo]

 

HOW:

We had 4 cachers in one vehicle.

We started by waiting across the street from the first cache until exactly midnight.

At midnight we ran across the street and started searching.

The weather was perfect.

 

Total Mileage Driven = 471.5 (1.08 miles per cache)

Total Caches found/Dnf'd =413/23

Average cache time = 3 Minutes 18 Seconds

 

With us approaching 10K ourselves and seeing that others hit 50 caches in that area in 4 hours going solo, we are inclined to believe their story (without comparing calculations/resumes/degrees with anyone else in this forum). We ourselves have found 50 in about four hours but never tried to go for 24 hours. Getting too old I guess.

Since there is no "Official" World Record so I assume that you did this for your own personal satisfication which is the exactly the same reason we cache at all.

Over the years we have seen other "World Record" caching runs, and

we have to admit that we greatly respect the ground rules that you guys set for yourselves.

- No pre-found caches

- No local guides to point out the caches for you,

- Everyone travels in the same vehicle,

- The log itself is signed/stickered. (no simply marking the outside of the container as proof you found it)

We have no problem that the driver did not get out of the vehicle at times, he was present when it was found.

We have no problem with placing stickers instead on signing the log, we have done that when caching with a group, saves time (and log space).

 

Like we said, we liked the ground rules you set and congratulate you on the achievement!

[+Kabuthunk]

Awesome accomplishment guys. My hat (or bandanna anyway, since if I wear anything on my head, it's that ) goes off to you. My one-day record is all of 15... but in my defense, that was over about a 4-hour stretch, travelled almost entirely on bike . Albeit, on some 'power trails', a bike may be more benificial than a vehicle... but this was large, hilly area.

 

In either case, that's some pretty sweet cache stats. Bet when you finally crashed from the adrenaline rush, you crashed hard .

 

And to all the 'mathematical impossibility' critics. Easy way to solve this. Either go yourself (or find someone willing to work with you already in the area), and pick... say... 10 arbitrary caches, spread out over the entire 'course'. Check the logbook. Their name in 'em all? Pretty decent bet that they accomplished the feat. BAM, problem solved.

[+TrailGators]

Congrats guys! That is incredible! I did 101 once in ~10 hours with two others and that was exhausting. I can't imagine doing over 4X that much in 24 hours. How long did it take to log all of those?

[+Rustynails]

I've already cached with these people. So I don't have to speculate on how they did this.

 

All of them put a lot of planning into their cache runs, even for a casual day of 80 or 90 caches. They prepare a list of the caches they will be doing in the order they will do them. The list will not have any caches that haven't been found after recent DNFs. For this run they may have eliminated caches with any recent DNF. The terrain will be 1 to 1.5 stars. The difficulty may be 2 stars or less. They will have checked on Google maps that the caches are near the road or in parking lots or off road are they can drive into. They will seldom vary from this list and usually only to skip a cache that turns out to be in an inaccessible area. The route is carefully planned to avoid left turns and u-turns. The hints are pre-decrypted and read in advance of looking. In addition they have read many of the logs to glean additional information such as parking and added that to the list. They limit search times and stick to this rule. They may search less time if the hint was a spoiler. They use stickers to save time signing names and sign a team name in caches logs that are too small for stickers. They keep track of what they find by checking them off the list as they do them. They may add notes if there is something special about a cache they can put in their online log, but on a run like this I suspect that most of the caches got a cut and paste log.

 

I've calculated how much time on average they had to travel between caches and what there average speed would be based on visiting 436 (413 + 23 DNFs) giving time spent at each cache ranging from 0 to 120 seconds:

 

avg time spent at each cache (secs) : average travel time between caches (min) : average speed (MPH)

0 : 3.31 : 19.65

15 : 3.06 : 21.25

30 : 2.81 : 23.15

45 ; 2.56 : 25.42

60 : 2.31 : 28.18

75 : 2.06 : 31.61

90 : 1.81 : 35.99

105 : 1.56 : 41.79

120 : 1.31 : 49.81

 

I would venture they averaged less than 60 seconds at a cache site: geting out of car, searching, removing the log, placing a sticker with all their names on it, replacing the log, rehiding cache, and getting back in car. That leaves 2 minutes and 18 seconds to drive to the next cache (average) at a speed that averaged just under 30 MPH. The people who don't buy these number have not cached with these cachers. 60 second to do everything they needed as group as each cache is certainly doable.

 

If I have any doubts about the record it would have to be with bathroom breaks. I will probably get into trouble here, but one of the cachers is known for taking frequent bathroom stops. I have been on hikes with this cacher and this cacher always seems at some time during the hike to split-off from the group and disappear behind some bushes. When urban caching, if there is a public restroom nearby after we find the cache we all have to wait. Based on this personal knowledge, I wonder if this cacher prepared for this record run like astronaut Lisa Nowak.

 

I'm sure they all had a great time and that was probably more important that setting any record. Congratulations on your achievement.

 

The more you crunch the numbers, the more unbelievable it becomes.

 

Now add the time to take those photo's and what ever other photo's were shot. Even more unbelievable.

[+sbell111]

 

I'll hesitate to call it the world record simply because of the fact that's there's no established way to actually qualify for such a feat. They way you did it would certainly be along the lines of the right way to go about it tho, at least IMHO. ................... Are there any 'qualifiers' that we need to properly categorize this potential World Record?

 

We spent some effort determining the NON-cheating methods to use in order to make a true World Record.

Although there are many variations on the "most caches in a day" record, some are not very "clean".

Here is a summary of what we decided was NON-cheating.....

rule one - NO cheating (if you're not sure whether it's cheating or not....it probably is)

The rest of the rules just attempt to clean up all the previous methods of marginal practices we've heard of.

rule two- NO previous knowledge of the caches or the route. (this include running the route with a local cacher who has previously found some or all of the caches, and also includes PRE-running any part of the route....to see where to park or otherwise)

rule three - The team must stick together (no splitting up to grab two or more caches at the same time)

rule four - The team must log, sticker or stamp the logsheet of every cache (nano's can be just initials to save log space).

rule five - NO time outs (all time counts, including Law Enforcement Officer stops, gas stops, food stops, and restroom stops)

rule six - one day is one day (midnight to midnight)

I wouldn't have a problem doing away with Rule 6, but I do like how it tidies up the online log.

[+The Jester]

I've already cached with these people. So I don't have to speculate on how they did this.

 

All of them put a lot of planning into their cache runs, even for a casual day of 80 or 90 caches. They prepare a list of the caches they will be doing in the order they will do them. The list will not have any caches that haven't been found after recent DNFs. For this run they may have eliminated caches with any recent DNF. The terrain will be 1 to 1.5 stars. The difficulty may be 2 stars or less. They will have checked on Google maps that the caches are near the road or in parking lots or off road are they can drive into. They will seldom vary from this list and usually only to skip a cache that turns out to be in an inaccessible area. The route is carefully planned to avoid left turns and u-turns. The hints are pre-decrypted and read in advance of looking. In addition they have read many of the logs to glean additional information such as parking and added that to the list. They limit search times and stick to this rule. They may search less time if the hint was a spoiler. They use stickers to save time signing names and sign a team name in caches logs that are too small for stickers. They keep track of what they find by checking them off the list as they do them. They may add notes if there is something special about a cache they can put in their online log, but on a run like this I suspect that most of the caches got a cut and paste log.

 

I've calculated how much time on average they had to travel between caches and what there average speed would be based on visiting 436 (413 + 23 DNFs) giving time spent at each cache ranging from 0 to 120 seconds:

 

avg time spent at each cache (secs) : average travel time between caches (min) : average speed (MPH)

0 : 3.31 : 19.65

15 : 3.06 : 21.25

30 : 2.81 : 23.15

45 ; 2.56 : 25.42

60 : 2.31 : 28.18

75 : 2.06 : 31.61

90 : 1.81 : 35.99

105 : 1.56 : 41.79

120 : 1.31 : 49.81

 

I would venture they averaged less than 60 seconds at a cache site: geting out of car, searching, removing the log, placing a sticker with all their names on it, replacing the log, rehiding cache, and getting back in car. That leaves 2 minutes and 18 seconds to drive to the next cache (average) at a speed that averaged just under 30 MPH. The people who don't buy these number have not cached with these cachers. 60 second to do everything they needed as group as each cache is certainly doable.

 

If I have any doubts about the record it would have to be with bathroom breaks. I will probably get into trouble here, but one of the cachers is known for taking frequent bathroom stops. I have been on hikes with this cacher and this cacher always seems at some time during the hike to split-off from the group and disappear behind some bushes. When urban caching, if there is a public restroom nearby after we find the cache we all have to wait. Based on this personal knowledge, I wonder if this cacher prepared for this record run like astronaut Lisa Nowak.

 

I'm sure they all had a great time and that was probably more important that setting any record. Congratulations on your achievement.

 

The more you crunch the numbers, the more unbelievable it becomes.

 

Now add the time to take those photo's and what ever other photo's were shot. Even more unbelievable.

Simultaneous actions. One closes and hides cache, one sets GPSr for next cache, one takes pictures, one starts car - all at the same time.

[PastorJon]

one starts car

 

In my picture of this event, the car never gets turned off...

 

Congrats on a great achievement...

 

I wonder, did you dream about caching when you finally got to sleep?

[knowschad]

Oh nevermind. The only way you will believe we actually did it is to verify each and every logsheet. So get going. Be sure to start at midnight and go fast.

 

 

Actually, a local geocaching couples posted on the MNGCA forums:

 

 

 

Wow, we were in Denver on Friday and saw those stickers on most of the caches we did near DIA. And we also found and moved their Ventura Kids Visit Denver Obsessed Geocoin. Small world.

 

[+niraD]

In my picture of this event, the car never gets turned off...

Well, they stopped for gas twice, so they should have turned off the car at least two times...

 

Congrats on a great achievement...

Ditto. Keeping up a pace like that for 24 hours is impressive.

[+ventura_kids]

one starts car

 

In my picture of this event, the car never gets turned off...

 

Congrats on a great achievement...

 

I wonder, did you dream about caching when you finally got to sleep?

 

That is correct.... car never gets shut off (except at gas station).

 

There was a point where one of us was freaking out, because they were so tired, that they thought they were asleep and dreaming..... dreaming about being in a car at night on a dirt road, speedcaching.....and then they opened their eyes and they were!

[+ventura_kids]

Congrats guys! That is incredible! I did 101 once in ~10 hours with two others and that was exhausting. I can't imagine doing over 4X that much in 24 hours. How long did it take to log all of those?

 

Whoops... I saw this same question a couple of times....sorry.

 

I was the last to log all my finds...because I work 6 days a week.

Even with cutting and pasting the same log on almost every cache, it still took me 4 evenings to complete the trip logging (about 16 hours). I noticed we actually found around 700 caches for the trip. (Somewhere in there I passed the 18,000 mark too)

 

It's almost as long to log them, as it is to find them.

If we struggled and tried to write something down unique for each one...we wouldn't have made the World Record. I applaud those cachers who take the time to try to remember every cache, and write something unique for every one of them.

I was being funny when I added the part about "this was one of my favorite caches" to all 413 cache logs.

[+Terza]

You guys are awesome! I've seen the difference between caching with 100-200 finds cachers and caching with 13,000 finds cachers. It's amazing how fast people can spot them. Two friends and I ran ourselves ragged finding 40 caches in an entire day of caching. We had our route planned and cache printouts. Caching for only a few hours with a hardcore cacher got us about 30 no problem (he was the driver and still managed to make most of the finds). We were just looking them up on the computer on the fly. It's really night and day depending on who you're with, you've got to see it to believe it.

[+wimseyguy]

There was a point where one of us was freaking out, because they were so tired, that they thought they were asleep and dreaming..... dreaming about being in a car at night on a dirt road, speedcaching.....and then they opened their eyes and they were!

I certainly hope it wasn't whoever was driving at that point.

[+ventura_kids]

There was a point where one of us was freaking out, because they were so tired, that they thought they were asleep and dreaming..... dreaming about being in a car at night on a dirt road, speedcaching.....and then they opened their eyes and they were!

I certainly hope it wasn't whoever was driving at that point.

 

They were in the back seat.

 

We did pretty good..... I only drove away with the doors open once. We worked out a method where the 3 passengers had to all say "GO" before I would drive away. I couldn't see them because we had the lights off in the jeep to keep the grasshoppers out. I did have a dash light that told me the doors were shut....but it didn't let me know a cacher was still outside.

[knowschad]

There was a point where one of us was freaking out, because they were so tired, that they thought they were asleep and dreaming..... dreaming about being in a car at night on a dirt road, speedcaching.....and then they opened their eyes and they were!

I certainly hope it wasn't whoever was driving at that point.

 

They were in the back seat.

 

We did pretty good..... I only drove away with the doors open once. We worked out a method where the 3 passengers had to all say "GO" before I would drive away. I couldn't see them because we had the lights off in the jeep to keep the grasshoppers out. I did have a dash light that told me the doors were shut....but it didn't let me know a cacher was still outside.

 

 

The seat belt is the part I hate. That, and having to plug the Nuvi back in. I don't know how he does it, but when I cache with Bobcam, he's always pulling out while I'm still fiddling with those things. He does, however, have an older vehicle than mine. Mine sounds like its going to explode if you drive ten feet without the seatbelt.

[+mc581]

 

HOW:

We had 4 cachers in one vehicle.

 

Total Mileage Driven = 471.5 (1.08 miles per cache)

Total Caches found/Dnf'd =413/23

Average cache time = 3 Minutes 18 Seconds

 

I see there are over 1500 caches in a 10 mile radius for Denver. That makes it possible. You need to drive to and find 18 caches an hour. That I find hard to believe. Not saying it never happened but it is hard to believe. Did all 4 of you sign the logs? Is there a magnetic micro on every second light post down there? It's only a world record if Guinness was there to witness. Hope you had fun . . .

[+ecanderson]

I see there are over 1500 caches in a 10 mile radius for Denver. That makes it possible. You need to drive to and find 18 caches an hour. That I find hard to believe. Not saying it never happened but it is hard to believe. Did all 4 of you sign the logs? Is there a magnetic micro on every second light post down there? It's only a world record if Guinness was there to witness. Hope you had fun . . .

If you had read more of the thread before posting, you'd already know how and why it was possible.

[J'nK]

It must have taken you another 24 hrs just log all your finds. dadgum!

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

It scares me that folks claiming to be engineers and mathematicians use math to prove that they really don't know much about math! Taking a known reality and trying to use math to prove that it couldn't have happened does not inspire confidence... I certainly wouldn't want some of the mathematicians who have posted here to work on my projects!

 

It's not a problem of math, but one of vision!

 

NOTABLE QUOTE BY DAVID SARNOFF'S ASSOCIATES IN RESPONSE TO HIS

URGINGS FOR INVESTMENT IN THE RADIO IN THE 1920S:

QUOTE

THE WIRELESS MUSIC BOX HAS NO IMAGINABLE COMMERCIAL VALUE. WHO WOULD

PAY FOR A MESSAGE SENT TO NOBODY IN PARTICULAR?

UNQUOTE

 

Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it can't happen

Edited September 12, 2009 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+niraD]

I see there are over 1500 caches in a 10 mile radius for Denver. That makes it possible. You need to drive to and find 18 caches an hour. That I find hard to believe. Not saying it never happened but it is hard to believe.

As ecanderson said, if you had read more of the thread before posting...

 

Did all 4 of you sign the logs?

No. They used preprinted stickers.

 

Is there a magnetic micro on every second light post down there?

The "light post" detail is wrong, but the basic idea is spot on.

 

It's only a world record if Guinness was there to witness.

No, it's only a Guinness world record if Guinness was there to witness. Guinness doesn't own the concept of world records.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

It's only a world record if Guinness was there to witness.

No, it's only a Guinness world record if Guinness was there to witness. Guinness doesn't own the concept of world records.

Now that is some seriously effective brand management, when they have much of the world equating the phrase "world record" with their Guinness brand! XEROX would be proud. For that matter so would Groundspeak, who has managed their brand so well that "geocaching" is almost universally related to their brand!

 

We did talk to Guinness before our Dallas Record Run but at that time they did not have a category for such a team record. We did go through the application process before that decision was made and found that Guinness need not be there, that in fact they very rarely are. They rely on self-reporting with some assurances (witnesses) support.

 

Therefore, a listed Guinness record has little if any more proof than this run and anyone can choose not to accept it. The magic of Guinness is that their name as a book publisher has grown to be equated with some kind of monitoring or accreditation agency... they just collect reporting on events and publish them!

Edited September 12, 2009 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+brodiebunch]

Congratulations

 

It does not sound like you had time to enjoy the search or the location of the caches.

 

But you achieved the numbers you were looking for though.

 

Congrats again

[4x4van]

It scares me that folks claiming to be engineers and mathematicians use math to prove that they really don't know much about math! Taking a known reality and trying to use math to prove that it couldn't have happened does not inspire confidence... I certainly wouldn't want some of the mathematicians who have posted here to work on my projects!

 

It's not a problem of math, but one of vision!

 

NOTABLE QUOTE BY DAVID SARNOFF'S ASSOCIATES IN RESPONSE TO HIS

URGINGS FOR INVESTMENT IN THE RADIO IN THE 1920S:

QUOTE

THE WIRELESS MUSIC BOX HAS NO IMAGINABLE COMMERCIAL VALUE. WHO WOULD

PAY FOR A MESSAGE SENT TO NOBODY IN PARTICULAR?

UNQUOTE

 

Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it can't happen

 

A few comments on this are in order. First, I don't "claim" to be an engineer, I "am" one, and the math is correct, period. Does it prove that it was impossible? No, but it does show that it was improbable. Second, I'm not taking a "known reality", since no one knows for a fact whether it happened, other than those who were there (which you weren't).

 

And your quote about radio is entirely irrelevant since the associates were commenting on the commercial viability, not whether or not the system would work.

 

I've heard here a couple of people say that they would only have had to average 30mph, which sounds pretty easy, right? Okay, let's take that number. Let's also take the fact that they stated that most of the caches were near 0.1 mile apart. That said, I have a challenge for you; Go out in your car, and drive one mile, coming to a complete stop 10 times during that mile. Accelerate as fast as you want/can, but make sure you actually make a complete stop every 0.1 mile, including the beginning and end. Time it. Can you do it in 2 minutes? That's averaging 30mph. I think you'll find that it's lot harder than it sounds, and demonstrates my earlier comment that acceleration & deceleration takes a huge bite out of average speed.

 

Again, I never said my math proves it was impossible. But like it or not, the math is correct (yes I know math) and does prove it's improbable.

Edited September 12, 2009 by 4x4van

[+TEAM HARTSOCK]

WHO:

EMC of Northridge California

F0T0M0M

Ventura_Kids

 

WHAT:

Set a new World Record for Speed caching.

We found a total of 413 caches in one day.

 

WHEN:

August 29th 2009 - Midnight to Midnight

 

WHERE:

Denver, Colorado, USA

 

WHY:

We just wanted to see if it could be done.

 

HOW:

We had 4 cachers in one vehicle.

We started by waiting across the street from the first cache until exactly midnight.

At midnight we ran across the street and started searching.

The weather was perfect.

 

Total Mileage Driven = 471.5 (1.08 miles per cache)

Total Caches found/Dnf'd =413/23

Average cache time = 3 Minutes 18 Seconds

 

If you were driving at 60mph, your drive time alone would be 7.85 hours all by itself (assuming the speed limit was 60mph in every instance.

That would only leave 16.15 hours of actual caching which would equate to 2.22 minutes of searching (average) per cache (adding the DNFs in).

 

The math is WAY off because there would be vehicle dismounting and remounting times with 4 people (sometimes the driver) and acceleration/deceleration variables. Not to mention at least one stop for gas assuming zero potty breaks....

Once all the variables are guessed out, that would be about 45-60 seconds per cache for locating and signing.

 

Call me a skeptic.....

Have you ever caches with a 10,000+ cache finding cacher? I doubt you have. If you have you would know that they can see a cache hiding spot from 1000 feet. I have cached with one and she was spotting and pointing out where the cache was hidden before I had put my GPS into search mode.

 

With four such cachers in the car I would guess that they spent less than 30 seconds actually finding the cache. It would take them longer to get the log out and back in to the plastic baggie.

 

No offense, but the first statement there about the 10,000+ cacher is sorta....well...nonsense. Yes, they are going to be more experience, but they still have to get to GZ. You can't tell me that someone can super guess the GPS when signal bounce is going on unless you are in a flat field and there is one tree or lamppost in that 1000 foot area you mentioined. Sure you walk up to a situation that is going to be obvios and they will be the first ones who gets it, but if I take you into the woods around here or down the city block, no one is going to say at 500 feet out, "oh it is in a hollow stump behind that tree". The point the original guy was making is that it takes a little time to actually find the cache. And no matter if you are Supercacherman with X-ray vision, it is going to take some time.

 

If they were all walk right up to it and log it, then while it would be a fun night of running with friends and having fun, there wouldn't be a real challenge in it. If the OP did this, and I have no reason to say they didn't other than it seems impossible with the timing, then great to them. Sounds like they had fun! If not, then big deal. Like someone said, Guiness doesn't have the exclusive right to claim world records and in the long run, a world record claim doesn't mean a hill of beans. So, they had a night of fun and did something impressive. My hat is off to you!

 

But just like I love to chew gum, but still don't feel a need to try to beat the guy/gal who chewed one stick of gum the longest just so they can claim it. I don't feel the need to best a possible record as this one. My choice. If someone out there feels they need to beat this to prove something to themselves or others, then ago go for it. I will stick to my variety of caches and keep those ones that require a couple mile hike enjoying the journey as we say.

[+ventura_kids]

It scares me that folks claiming to be engineers and mathematicians use math to prove that they really don't know much about math! Taking a known reality and trying to use math to prove that it couldn't have happened does not inspire confidence... I certainly wouldn't want some of the mathematicians who have posted here to work on my projects!

 

It's not a problem of math, but one of vision!

 

NOTABLE QUOTE BY DAVID SARNOFF'S ASSOCIATES IN RESPONSE TO HIS

URGINGS FOR INVESTMENT IN THE RADIO IN THE 1920S:

QUOTE

THE WIRELESS MUSIC BOX HAS NO IMAGINABLE COMMERCIAL VALUE. WHO WOULD

PAY FOR A MESSAGE SENT TO NOBODY IN PARTICULAR?

UNQUOTE

 

Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it can't happen

 

A few comments on this are in order. First, I don't "claim" to be an engineer, I "am" one, and the math is correct, period. Does it prove that it was impossible? No, but it does show that it was improbable. Second, I'm not taking a "known reality", since no one knows for a fact whether it happened, other than those who were there (which you weren't).

 

And your quote about radio is entirely irrelevant since the associates were commenting on the commercial viability, not whether or not the system would work.

 

I've heard here a couple of people say that they would only have had to average 30mph, which sounds pretty easy, right? Okay, let's take that number. Let's also take the fact that they stated that most of the caches were near 0.1 mile apart. That said, I have a challenge for you; Go out in your car, and drive one mile, coming to a complete stop 10 times during that mile. Accelerate as fast as you want/can, but make sure you actually make a complete stop every 0.1 mile, including the beginning and end. Time it. Can you do it in 2 minutes? That's averaging 30mph. I think you'll find that it's lot harder than it sounds, and demonstrates my earlier comment that acceleration & deceleration takes a huge bite out of average speed.

 

Again, I never said my math proves it was impossible. But like it or not, the math is correct (yes I know math) and does prove it's improbable.

 

Easy kids ..... let's attack the question.....not each other.

 

Fact - It is a known Reality . We did it . This is not a 3rd party or hearsay story.

 

Now...let's get back to the math.

 

I agree that acceleration and deceleration takes time....but let's allow us to drive forward during that time.

 

I don't remember ever stopping to grab a cache every tenth of a mile. Our average was just over a mile per cache (1.08 mile per cache average) Therefore we would not have to stop 10 times within the 2 minute period you came up with. I believe our average was 3 minutes and 18 seconds per cache. So let's be fair when trying to set up a test (I learned that in science class).

Drive one mile and stop. If you did it in less than 2 minutes, you can make the record...just keep doing that (on average) for 24 hours. That's the tough part. Don't think of 4 slow cachers.... we are all "fast as lightning". One minute is plenty of time for us to find and log a cache.

 

Although I do like your example..... IF there were 10 caches each Point one mile apart (which there were NOT), we would actually have tons of time to find them (3 minutes and 18 seconds per cache = 33 minutes) . We could save up a bunch of time to use later. Perhaps we could save up enough time to sing Happy Birthday to EMC in a gas station (while fueling up of course).

 

I'll tell you the toughest part of remaining consistantly fast. When we came to a cache that we could NOT find, we had to be strict in our time limit. If we didn't find it in ONE minute, we HAD to leave. That's the tough part.

Edited September 12, 2009 by ventura_kids

[+TEAM HARTSOCK]

one starts car

 

In my picture of this event, the car never gets turned off...

 

Congrats on a great achievement...

 

I wonder, did you dream about caching when you finally got to sleep?

 

That is correct.... car never gets shut off (except at gas station).

 

There was a point where one of us was freaking out, because they were so tired, that they thought they were asleep and dreaming..... dreaming about being in a car at night on a dirt road, speedcaching.....and then they opened their eyes and they were!

 

[4x4van]

 

Fact - It is a known Reality . We did it . This is not a 3rd party or hearsay story.

 

Now...let's get back to the math.

 

I agree that acceleration and deceleration takes time....but let's allow us to drive forward during that time.

 

I don't remember ever stopping to grab a cache every tenth of a mile. Our average was just over a mile per cache (1.08 mile per cache average) Therefore we would not have to stop 10 times within the 2 minute period you came up with. I believe our average was 3 minutes and 18 seconds per cache. So let's be fair when trying to set up a test (I learned that in science class).

Drive one mile and stop. If you did it in less than 2 minutes, you can make the record...just keep doing that (on average) for 24 hours. That's the tough part. Don't think of 4 slow cachers.... we are all "fast as lightning". One minute is plenty of time for us to find and log a cache.

 

Although I do like your example..... IF there were 10 caches each Point one mile apart (which there were NOT), we would actually have tons of time to find them (3 minutes and 18 seconds per cache = 33 minutes) . We could save up a bunch of time to use later. Perhaps we could save up enough time to sing Happy Birthday to EMC in a gas station (while fueling up of course).

 

I'll tell you the toughest part of remaining consistantly fast. When we came to a cache that we could NOT find, we had to be strict in our time limit. If we didn't find it in ONE minute, we HAD to leave. That's the tough part.

 

To you, it's a fact. To the rest of us, it is 3rd party. As for the spacing, I apologize, but I seem to remember a post somewhere in this thread claiming that most of the caches were just over 0.1 mile apart. Sorry if I'm wrong about that. Your 3:18 per cache includes the driving time as well as finding/signing (sticker), so I don't consider that "tons" of time. The time eaten up by the acceleration/deceleration every 0.1 mile would have eliminated any "time" to use later.

 

I'm still skeptical, although not as much as I was, partly because of the fact that I have met you (Geo-Ocotillo, right?), and partly because the math does not make it impossible, just improbable.

Edited September 12, 2009 by 4x4van

[+ventura_kids]

Yep.... We love to head out to Anza Borrego in the jeep.

This is just another fun thing we love to do.

It's certainly not for everyone.

 

I will admit that there are a few opportunities to cheat, but we went WAY out of our way to ensure our new World Record was Clean, clean, clean.

 

This will not be the final chapter in this Record either. Although it is quite unbelievable to those who consider their 12 cache day to be an accomplishment, there is still room for a bigger number.

 

We should calculate the maximum number available.

The optimum distance will be point one (as that is set by the guidelines).

The optimum time to find a cache and move to the next one is going to be around 2.5 or 3 minutes. (average over 24 hours).

Once the area is totally saturated with a cache every tenth in a grid pattern, and the area has roads to get between them.... what's the number? 500+

We are not there yet.

[+traildad]

A tracklog would be proof enough.

Track logs can be created so I wouldn't consider it "proof".

[+traildad]

Having been there... I know what we did....

 

I will admit when I saw the initial reports of 406, I had my doubts... but I now beleive it completely...

 

If not for a few mishaps, some lower density towards the end of the run, and several DNFs, I think we could have hit 440. We were on target for 440 most of the day.

 

As for the time at each cache, we seldom spent more than a minute. Thankfully, these were very simple and consistent hides. Most of them took 5 seconds to quickly walk to, and a couple of seconds to grab. Most of the minute was spent getting the log in/out of the container. I do not think we looked more than a minute at more than a handful of caches. If we were approaching 2 minutes, we called it, got back in the car and headed towards the next cache.

 

Thanks for all the congratulations.....

 

Jim - of f0t0m0m

Finding 100, 200, 300 or 400 identical lamppost hides is not what I would call caching. Geocaching records are kind of like course records with golfing. The best score on one course can't be compared to the best score on a different course. Do the same 400 someone else did and have time left over to do more and you beat their record. This whole thing sounds more like an exercise in endurance than caching.

[+sTeamTraen]

Can any of the people here who are, in effect, accusing the people who claim to have done this of lying, come up with an explanation of why several very well-respected cachers would do something so stupid as to make this up?

 

The caches are out there. The stickers are in the logs, presumably in chronological order between the finders from August 28th and the finders from August 30th. Even without that sequence, the people concerned can probably account for their movements to show that they were not in the Denver area in the preceding month, during which many of these caches will probably have been placed or received new log books. It takes one cache owner to drive out there and find one cache without that sticker in chronological order, to make these people into the biggest jerks in Geoworld. Does anyone really think that the kind of people who have what it takes to become 10K+ cachers would do that?

[+bittsen]

Can any of the people here who are, in effect, accusing the people who claim to have done this of lying, come up with an explanation of why several very well-respected cachers would do something so stupid as to make this up?

 

The caches are out there. The stickers are in the logs, presumably in chronological order between the finders from August 28th and the finders from August 30th. Even without that sequence, the people concerned can probably account for their movements to show that they were not in the Denver area in the preceding month, during which many of these caches will probably have been placed or received new log books. It takes one cache owner to drive out there and find one cache without that sticker in chronological order, to make these people into the biggest jerks in Geoworld. Does anyone really think that the kind of people who have what it takes to become 10K+ cachers would do that?

 

I don't think anyone has accused anyone of "lying". There have been a few that were skeptical.

A HUGE difference. To make the leap from being a skeptic to an accusation of lying is, in itself, not cool.

[+wimseyguy]

I respectfully suggest that the naysayers visit the caches in question to verify that the preprinted name stickers are in the caches as claimed if they don't want to accept the claim. I'm satisfied with it, and applaud them for even trying to get so many.

 

I've had several 12+ hour caching days, but can't imagine going for 24 straight.

[+sTeamTraen]

I don't think anyone has accused anyone of "lying". There have been a few that were skeptical.

A HUGE difference. To make the leap from being a skeptic to an accusation of lying is, in itself, not cool.

One can be skeptical of something which someone claims they are going to do, until they've done it. One can be skeptical of something which people claim to have experienced, if the skepticism concerns whether or not the experience actually took place (if you think you've been abducted by aliens, and I think you dreamed it, for example). But when it comes to a concrete claim to have achieved something where nobody disagrees on the definition of what has allegedly been done, you can't be "skeptical", except if you're using the word "skeptical" as a euphemism; you can only say that you don't believe that it took place, and unless you're suggesting that the particpants are deluded, or had very slow watches, then you are accusing them of lying for all practical purposes. Certainly enough to get your nose punched by this guy.

 

Maybe nobody has actually used the "L" word in this thread (until I did). But if A tells B, with no hint of irony, winking, or suggestion of embellishment, that A has just achieved "X", and B then starts to discuss, in public and in front of A, why they consider "X" to be clearly mechanically impossible - not "an amazing performance", but "dude, I have done the math (and there is no way you could have done that)" - then B *is* accusing A of lying, to all intents and purposes.

Edited September 12, 2009 by sTeamTraen

[+traildad]

Can any of the people here who are, in effect, accusing the people who claim to have done this of lying, come up with an explanation of why several very well-respected cachers would do something so stupid as to make this up?

 

The caches are out there. The stickers are in the logs, presumably in chronological order between the finders from August 28th and the finders from August 30th. Even without that sequence, the people concerned can probably account for their movements to show that they were not in the Denver area in the preceding month, during which many of these caches will probably have been placed or received new log books. It takes one cache owner to drive out there and find one cache without that sticker in chronological order, to make these people into the biggest jerks in Geoworld. Does anyone really think that the kind of people who have what it takes to become 10K+ cachers would do that?

I have seen doubters, I have not seen anyone accuse them of lying. If anyone was going to bother with faking something like this it would be people who have what it takes to become 10k cachers. You really have to care to do that. Simply lying is not the only way to fake this. You could have several cachers all out on the same night "finding" caches on their own and putting the group sticker on the log. Then comes the claim that they were all found as a group, = "new record". No one could prove otherwise unless there was a witness or a video surveillance camera. I DO NOT accuse them of anything. I only say that it is possible to fake something like this.

[+sTeamTraen]

You could have several cachers all out on the same night "finding" caches on their own and putting the group sticker on the log. Then comes the claim that they were all found as a group, = "new record". No one could prove otherwise unless there was a witness or a video surveillance camera. I DO NOT accuse them of anything. I only say that it is possible to fake something like this.

So, there are four people doing it to claim it, and 20 other helpers doing it to enable the other 4 to get all of the glory? I can sort of imagine that if there were to be a million-dollar prize and the 4 agree to give $20,000 each to the other 20, keep $125,000 for themselves, and $100,000 back to pay the hitman if one of the 20 squeals - but really, how much less likely is that, than that the 4 people just did it?

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I don't think anyone has accused anyone of "lying". There have been a few that were skeptical.

A HUGE difference. To make the leap from being a skeptic to an accusation of lying is, in itself, not cool.

Um, no.

 

Party of the first part "I did something"

 

Party of the second part "I don't think you did. Here's some math that proves that you couldn't have, or that it's not very likely"

 

Yup, that's calling him a liar!

 

To publicly dispute someone's word without reason, evidence or cause is what's not cool

 

"Well, that's not my way of caching, I wouldn't do it, and besides... there ain't no record" isn't too cool either.

[+ventura_kids]

I'm ok with the jealousy.....

 

I just want to know where our prize is.

[+ecanderson]

A few comments on this are in order. First, I don't "claim" to be an engineer, I "am" one, and the math is correct, period. Does it prove that it was impossible? No, but it does show that it was improbable.

I are one too.

 

The math is only as good as the variables you put into the function. Having BEEN to 50+ of the sites in question, and being intimately familiar with the area, I know what kinds of numbers belong on the input side. Your math makes the process improbable not because of the equation but due to a problem with some of the assumptions. A correct set of input parameters makes it a difficult task (not at all an improbable one) without a very well organized team -- and they've got one.

 

I checked back to see what I had logged the time I was out in that area. It was actually even better than I had recalled. I made the run on 1/18/09. My last log of the day was for GC1KVJ1 (not an easy one, but I got lucky). The full log entry follows ... and remember, I wasn't in a rush to do these caches or trying to set any records - just trying to get the very un-ordinary ones out of the way as I searched for the few decent ones out there, and those "better" ones were part of the average. Note that the total was actually 52 in 3-1/2 hours, SOLO, all logs SIGNED, not stickered. About 1 every 4 minutes. No one can convince me that 413 by a team in 24 is in the least bit improbable. At that rate, it would have been 360 solo, and I didn't even pass on the harder ones. No, I have no doubts that they made the 413. I also think they were completely crazy for doing it!

 

------------------------------

GC1KVJ1

 

Flashlight in hand, I was determined. Determined to WHAT? Going after a Brady 3.0 cache with a flashlight in the dark in a windstorm? Am I nuts?

 

As fate would have it, the search lasted only a couple of minutes. Not being bashful, I did what had to be done and bagged this bad boy; no lifelines!

 

Great way to end the day, and I want to thank all of those who created this bizarre and target rich environment. 52 caches in about 3-1/2 hours, one every 4 minutes. I doubt I'll ever see numbers like THAT again! WHEW!

 

Edited September 12, 2009 by ecanderson

[+ecanderson]

I respectfully suggest that the naysayers visit the caches in question to verify that the preprinted name stickers are in the caches as claimed if they don't want to accept the claim. I'm satisfied with it, and applaud them for even trying to get so many.

 

I've had several 12+ hour caching days, but can't imagine going for 24 straight.

Amen to both paragraphs. I'm not sure I could do 24 unless Starbucks starts to deliver to the boonies! My thermos won't keep it hot that long.

 

Like others here, I find the use of the word "improbable" to be nothing more than an indirect way of saying "I don't buy it". Call it "very difficult" and we're still being civil.

 

So I'll even go your suggestion above one better. The naysayers can save their bus fare. I've got no dog in this fight, but do know the lay of the land.

 

If the folks who are SO convinced that the assumptions they are building into their mathematical models is so great, and are willing to suggest that it is "improbable" that the deed was done, I'll let them pick any 10 of these caches at random, and I'll PERSONALLY wander on out there and photo the bloody things, stickers and all. Put up [a list] or shut up time! I'll be expecting an apology to Ventura & co when I'm done if I find them all logged, or an apology from Ventura & co if I don't. Having been there (unlike about everyone else here), I'm betting on the former.

[+ventura_kids]

Don't waste your time...

 

How about this.... I'll go find another place to find 450 caches in one day, and set another record !