+bittsen Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 (edited) Can it be possible to increase the difficulty rating of a cache in order to increase it's difficulty? Let's say a cache is really a 1.5 difficulty but the CO rates it a 3.0 Then would cachers presume it's not a nano attached to a bracket on a park bench but perhaps under some rocks in a creek bed. What do you think? P.S. This question reflects a real situation on a recent find. Edited February 2, 2010 by bittsen Quote Link to comment
+beejay&esskay Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 I think difficulty and terrain ratings should be as accurate as possible. Also coordinates, attributes and the state. Quote Link to comment
+t4e Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Can it be possible to increase the difficulty of a cache in order to increase it's difficulty? i don't quite follow that statement difficulty rating should reflect the real difficulty of the hide Quote Link to comment
Motorcycle_Mama Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Deliberately misstating anything about a cache, whether it's the difficulty rating, terrain rating, coordinates, size, or container type, seems bogus to me. Seems like the hider is trying to be "cute" or "clever" falsely. In my opinion. The information on the cache page should accurately reflect the actual status and condition of the cache. In my opinion. Quote Link to comment
+bittsen Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 Deliberately misstating anything about a cache, whether it's the difficulty rating, terrain rating, coordinates, size, or container type, seems bogus to me. Seems like the hider is trying to be "cute" or "clever" falsely. In my opinion. The information on the cache page should accurately reflect the actual status and condition of the cache. In my opinion. Oh, I don't think it was intentional on the hiders part. I think they thought it would be more difficult even though it was "par for the course" for me. If I had seen it was a 1.5 I would have nailed it in seconds. It was rated higher which inspired me to look in more difficult locations which ended up making me take 10 minutes to find it. Others didn't find it at all. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Sounds like the "self fulfilling prophecy". It wasn't going to exist but now that it has been thought of it has to exists. Just like soft coordinates falsifying any of the information is not clever. However, you indicate that it may not have been intentional. If that is true someone may want to make a tactful attempt to help the hider improve their ratings estimates. From 1.5 to 3 is a big jump in a five star system. Just mention it in your log and try to talk to the hider one on one at the next event. Quote Link to comment
+Isonzo Karst Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Some years ago, a novice cacher hid a magnetic micro in a lampskirt. They rated it a "4". Numbers of people DNFed it. They didn't fool with the lamp skirt; obviously, it wasn't there, it was "4"! ;-) This is a true story. Quote Link to comment
+bittsen Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 Some years ago, a novice cacher hid a magnetic micro in a lampskirt. They rated it a "4". Numbers of people DNFed it. They didn't fool with the lamp skirt; obviously, it wasn't there, it was "4"! ;-) This is a true story. Exactly my point. So, by rating it a 4, they, indeed, made it a 4. Quote Link to comment
+beejay&esskay Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 But I don't see rating a LPC as a 4 by a novice an intentional attempt to mislead. Until you find the first one, LPCs are very hard. Quote Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Let's say a cache is really a 1.5 difficulty but the CO rates it a 3.0 Then would cachers presume it's not a nano attached to a bracket on a park bench but perhaps under some rocks in a creek bed. Yes, it would probably mislead many of the seekers. Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 There's a cacher sorta in the area that is, according to the license plate, partially disabled. Both difficulty and terrain from this person's caches seem to be rated higher than most feel it should be. But for this person a foot further up or over may be a bit to handle and very painful. In this person's mind (and ability) it's rated correctly. We try to remember that and usually refrain from stating "how easy it was" in the log. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Until you find the first one, LPCs are very hard. My first LPC: I had found many caches, all of which were at fairly kewl spots, and as a result, I developed a sense of entitlement, believing that being taken to such spots, whether to find an ammo can or a blinky, was the true purpose behind this game. In my defense, I was a few years younger and quite naive about the various intricacies of the game. I was mindlessly following the arrow on my Magellan SporTrak Color, driving down the road, when it pointed at a parking lot. Naturally, I followed, thinking "Someone must've found a really kewl spot in a parking lot!". (sigh...) I looked at the distance and direction and all I saw that matched was a lamp post. Surely, I thought, no one would want to bring me here... What's kewl about 500 acres of sweltering, exhaust laden blacktop bristling with soccer mom driven SUVs? I kept following, and the arrow kept pointing to a particular lamp post. At that point, I assumed the hider had flubbed the coords. Knowing no one would be lame enough to tuck a cache under a lamp post kilt, I checked anyway, since I was there. Out popped a film can, with a naturally soggy log. Santa died for me that day. Hard? I'd say not. Quote Link to comment
+bittsen Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 Until you find the first one, LPCs are very hard. My first LPC: Santa died for me that day. Hard? I'd say not. And, we can all assume that was the last lamp post skirt cache you ever claimed, yes? At least now we know why you have so much angst of damp cache logs. First wet cache log and the death of Santa. Must have been very traumatic. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 No. I get your drift, but I don't think it'd work. We'd spot the cache and moan and groan and say "that wasn't a 3.5!!!' Done it too many times already. Quote Link to comment
+narcissa Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 I don't think this is a good practice. Terrain and difficulty ratings should be as accurate as possible. Quote Link to comment
+Too Tall John Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 (edited) I spent a lot of time today trying to figure out where a particular cache could be hidden to qualify it for the 5 star terrain it had. Spent a lot of time looking up in the trees for something I'd have to climb after, etc. Turns out, it was hanging in a tree branch, just a bit below eye level. Yep, it made it more difficult, but in an aggravating way. No, I haven't logged my finds yet today. If you want to figure out which cache I'm talking about, you'll have to wait 'til tomorrow. Edited February 2, 2010 by Too Tall John Quote Link to comment
+bittsen Posted February 2, 2010 Author Share Posted February 2, 2010 See? That's what I was referring to. No, I don't want to do it but the concept is amusing to me. After several hundred finds, one would think they had seen it all and would have great geosenses but it seems like the more you know, the harder it is to see the easy stuff. I know on more than one occasion I have looked for a cache as if it was a 3.0 or so only to find it's right in front of my nose (not aware of the actual difficulty rating) Quote Link to comment
+brslk Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 I think the terrain rating should be as accurate as possible. The difficulty rating is somewhat subjective. As Bittsen said... if it makes it a four for you to find it, then isn't it a four? (not a direct quote) Good question though... Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Can it be possible to increase the difficulty of a cache in order to increase it's difficulty? i don't quite follow that statement difficulty rating should reflect the real difficulty of the hide I'm guessing the idea is to rate it higher so people don't start off looking in the usual places first. As someone else said that is bogus. There's a cacher sorta in the area that is, according to the license plate, partially disabled. Both difficulty and terrain from this person's caches seem to be rated higher than most feel it should be. But for this person a foot further up or over may be a bit to handle and very painful. In this person's mind (and ability) it's rated correctly. Well it isn't rate correctly. There are standards and they refer to the "average" geocacher. The exact definition of average may be debatable but I don't think average means people with disabilities. Quote Link to comment
+Taoiseach Posted February 2, 2010 Share Posted February 2, 2010 Until you find the first one, LPCs are very hard. My first LPC: I had found many caches, all of which were at fairly kewl spots, and as a result, I developed a sense of entitlement, believing that being taken to such spots, whether to find an ammo can or a blinky, was the true purpose behind this game. In my defense, I was a few years younger and quite naive about the various intricacies of the game. I was mindlessly following the arrow on my Magellan SporTrak Color, driving down the road, when it pointed at a parking lot. Naturally, I followed, thinking "Someone must've found a really kewl spot in a parking lot!". (sigh...) I looked at the distance and direction and all I saw that matched was a lamp post. Surely, I thought, no one would want to bring me here... What's kewl about 500 acres of sweltering, exhaust laden blacktop bristling with soccer mom driven SUVs? I kept following, and the arrow kept pointing to a particular lamp post. At that point, I assumed the hider had flubbed the coords. Knowing no one would be lame enough to tuck a cache under a lamp post kilt, I checked anyway, since I was there. Out popped a film can, with a naturally soggy log. Santa died for me that day. Hard? I'd say not. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 And, we can all assume that was the last lamp post skirt cache you ever claimed, yes? Actually, it was possibly the first cache I found, that I did not log/claim. My current practice is, if I find something that I think is a real stinker of a cache, (entirely subjective & biased, I know), I just don't log it at all. What strikes me as curious is this is a practice I've only been doing for a couple years, that I remember. Yet, checking my finds from the early days, I can't locate that one. I thought I logged it... Either I didn't log it, or my log got deleted and I never noticed. Either way, I'm OK with it. Quote Link to comment
+mountainman38 Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 But I don't see rating a LPC as a 4 by a novice an intentional attempt to mislead. Until you find the first one, LPCs are very hard. Before my first LPC, I had no idea those skirts were liftable. My GPSr led me to a small island in a parking lot, with nothing but some shrubs, a rock, and a lamp post. Like the Children of Israel ready to storm Jericho, I circled that island 7 seven times. Nothing happened. I looked everywhere I could think of, and was back in my truck ready to when I decided to read the logs. Something about an LPC caught my eye, and Google rescued me. Ta-da! I found a magnetic key holder up inside the skirt. Pretty darn cool! Of course, once you know what they are, they lose their charm. Now when my GPSr leads me to the middle of a sea of asphalt shaded by lamp posts, I just keep driving. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.