Final Coordinates not actually at GZ. Is this common?

[+Jenscham]

Hi everyone,

 

I am fairly new to geocaching (only 86 finds) but I have been involved in the sport for three years. I just have a quick question about a cache in my area, GC25HCT. I wanted to start a thread about it here, rather than posts notes on the cache page.

 

The CO placed the cache and mislabeled it as a traditional when it was actually a multi. But this isn't the main concern I have. The final coordinates are not actually at GZ. The CO wanted to place something that was more "difficult" so this was their solution I guess. Of all the caches I have found, the final coordinates have actually brought me to the approx. area of the hide. As you may notice from the history, the final coordinates are a problem, but the CO refuses to fix the issue because they don't want to make it "too easy." Does this make any sense?

 

Thanks for your time everyone and happy cach-ing

[+Walts Hunting]

He needs to ask his reviewer to change it to a Mystery (if that is possible). A multi has coordinates to the next stage at each location.

 

If I had tried for this thinking it was a traditional and saw what it was I would have submitted a needs archived to make sure the reviewer was notified or a personal note to the reviewer with the URL for the cache for him/her to check on.

[+beejay&esskay]

There is a nearby cacher who has (traditional) caches with intentionally bad coordinates to make them more challenging.

 

I ignore them.

[+wimseyguy]

It's also possible they changed it after it was reviewed and published.

I'd shoot the reviewer a note, he can help the CO get the type changed.

[+StarBrand]

That is some kind of Major long hint!! - Apparently not at all a helpful one either.

 

Wrong cache type and bad coords - shoot the reviewer an email and add it to your ignore list.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

A lot of things wrong with this one. The drag-on-and-on hint might be a problem for some paperless units, too.

 

I believe the CO simply doesn't understand what he/she is doing. Has even posted a find on own cache instead of the note that it was intended to be.

 

Oh well, we all gotta start somewhere.

[+Jenscham]

That is some kind of Major long hint!! - Apparently not at all a helpful one either.

 

Wrong cache type and bad coords - shoot the reviewer an email and add it to your ignore list.

 

Good advice. And the hint actually makes no sense. There is a huge tree there, but it's not a pine tree. And there is a memorial that is knee high, but it's not in a tree, it's on a rock. But because the coordinates are bad, I have no idea if I am even in the right place. I should just put it on my ignore list, but this is the last for me to do before I clear all the caches in town. Maybe I should just let go.

[knowschad]

From those guidelines that the cache owner said that he read when he checked off the boxes on the submission page:

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS. GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching. Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS, the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions.

 

In addition, this Google search on "soft coords" (which is what we call them around here) will give you plenty of reading material.

[+wyattdogg]

From those guidelines that the cache owner said that he read when he checked off the boxes on the submission page:

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS. GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching. Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS, the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions.

 

In addition, this Google search on "soft coords" (which is what we call them around here) will give you plenty of reading material.

 

Hello all,

 

I am generally very new to both the site forums as well as geocaching as im sure you will see by my join date. I have just a quick question regarding the " soft coord " issue.

 

I have done an absolute ton of reading and have decided not to ask many questions because the answers are probably here somewhere so why waste everyone's time. That being said, I have read an awful lot about how much ones Gpsr can differ from anothers regarding homeing in on a coord. I understand this completely. Instead of listing soft coords for a cache, what if someone was to draw a box with coords at all four corners of said box and list those. It would give you a general idea of a cache being listed within these coords, ie making it a bit more challenging, but not making quit the wild goose chase of soft coords with bad clues that lead you way astray.

 

Just a thought , as I am new, prolly a bad one.

[Whichwaydoigo]

Hi everyone,

 

I am fairly new to geocaching (only 86 finds) but I have been involved in the sport for three years. I just have a quick question about a cache in my area, GC25HCT. I wanted to start a thread about it here, rather than posts notes on the cache page.

 

The CO placed the cache and mislabeled it as a traditional when it was actually a multi. But this isn't the main concern I have. The final coordinates are not actually at GZ. The CO wanted to place something that was more "difficult" so this was their solution I guess. Of all the caches I have found, the final coordinates have actually brought me to the approx. area of the hide. As you may notice from the history, the final coordinates are a problem, but the CO refuses to fix the issue because they don't want to make it "too easy." Does this make any sense?

 

Thanks for your time everyone and happy cach-ing

Post the coordinates where you found the cache and then go find a billion others.

[Andronicus]

From those guidelines that the cache owner said that he read when he checked off the boxes on the submission page:

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS. GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching. Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS, the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions.

 

In addition, this Google search on "soft coords" (which is what we call them around here) will give you plenty of reading material.

 

Hello all,

 

I am generally very new to both the site forums as well as geocaching as im sure you will see by my join date. I have just a quick question regarding the " soft coord " issue.

 

I have done an absolute ton of reading and have decided not to ask many questions because the answers are probably here somewhere so why waste everyone's time. That being said, I have read an awful lot about how much ones Gpsr can differ from anothers regarding homeing in on a coord. I understand this completely. Instead of listing soft coords for a cache, what if someone was to draw a box with coords at all four corners of said box and list those. It would give you a general idea of a cache being listed within these coords, ie making it a bit more challenging, but not making quit the wild goose chase of soft coords with bad clues that lead you way astray.

 

Just a thought , as I am new, prolly a bad one.

 

Not a bad idea "IFF" it is a puzzle/mystery cache and it is obvious to the searcher that that is what is the deal is. For traditionals, it you want it to be challanging, you are supposed to hide it better, not give crappy coordinates (I think calling them 'soft' is a little too nice)

[+wyattdogg]

From those guidelines that the cache owner said that he read when he checked off the boxes on the submission page:

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS. GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching. Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS, the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions.

 

In addition, this Google search on "soft coords" (which is what we call them around here) will give you plenty of reading material.

 

Hello all,

 

I am generally very new to both the site forums as well as geocaching as im sure you will see by my join date. I have just a quick question regarding the " soft coord " issue.

 

I have done an absolute ton of reading and have decided not to ask many questions because the answers are probably here somewhere so why waste everyone's time. That being said, I have read an awful lot about how much ones Gpsr can differ from anothers regarding homeing in on a coord. I understand this completely. Instead of listing soft coords for a cache, what if someone was to draw a box with coords at all four corners of said box and list those. It would give you a general idea of a cache being listed within these coords, ie making it a bit more challenging, but not making quit the wild goose chase of soft coords with bad clues that lead you way astray.

 

Just a thought , as I am new, prolly a bad one.

 

Not a bad idea "IFF" it is a puzzle/mystery cache and it is obvious to the searcher that that is what is the deal is. For traditionals, it you want it to be challanging, you are supposed to hide it better, not give crappy coordinates (I think calling them 'soft' is a little too nice)

 

Point well taken, I guess it would definitely fall much more in the mystery category.

[+Minimike2]

Around here the 'softest' coordinates are almost exclusively done by Apple aficionados. I am not certain, but I think their thought process is along the lines of, "I am cool with my iPhone and if the others don't have an iPhone, they deserve to be losers."

[knowschad]

Point well taken, I guess it would definitely fall much more in the mystery category.

Really, with today's GPS units and a little care taken by the hider, coordinates can be incredibily accurate these days. Occasionally I will find myself back at locations where I found caches several years ago, and am amazed when I think about the large area I covered that I then considered a normal search.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Hello all,

 

I am generally very new to both the site forums as well as geocaching as im sure you will see by my join date. I have just a quick question regarding the " soft coord " issue.

 

I have done an absolute ton of reading and have decided not to ask many questions because the answers are probably here somewhere so why waste everyone's time. That being said, I have read an awful lot about how much ones Gpsr can differ from anothers regarding homeing in on a coord. I understand this completely. Instead of listing soft coords for a cache, what if someone was to draw a box with coords at all four corners of said box and list those. It would give you a general idea of a cache being listed within these coords, ie making it a bit more challenging, but not making quit the wild goose chase of soft coords with bad clues that lead you way astray.

 

Just a thought , as I am new, prolly a bad one.

 

What you propose is really a good idea (basis) for a mystery or puzzle cache. Your idea is sound and different.

 

Deliberate "soft coords" really though, are somebody's inane attempt at increasing difficulty. "Soft coords" could also be the result of one not quite knowing what they are doing -- case in point: just how this thread started.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Around here the 'softest' coordinates are almost exclusively done by Apple aficionados. I am not certain, but I think their thought process is along the lines of, "I am cool with my iPhone and if the others don't have an iPhone, they deserve to be losers."

 

And then they state that their iPhone was accurate to 60' in the listing. For the cost of one month's service, they can get an eTrex yellow and get to at least 20-30' accuracy!

[+Jenscham]

Hi everyone,

 

I am fairly new to geocaching (only 86 finds) but I have been involved in the sport for three years. I just have a quick question about a cache in my area, GC25HCT. I wanted to start a thread about it here, rather than posts notes on the cache page.

 

The CO placed the cache and mislabeled it as a traditional when it was actually a multi. But this isn't the main concern I have. The final coordinates are not actually at GZ. The CO wanted to place something that was more "difficult" so this was their solution I guess. Of all the caches I have found, the final coordinates have actually brought me to the approx. area of the hide. As you may notice from the history, the final coordinates are a problem, but the CO refuses to fix the issue because they don't want to make it "too easy." Does this make any sense?

 

Thanks for your time everyone and happy cach-ing

Post the coordinates where you found the cache and then go find a billion others.

 

I would love to do this, if I could have found the darn thing. Believe me I would have posted them in a New York minute. But I can't even get the CO to let us know if it is still there.

[+Jenscham]

I looks like the Cache Reviewer has taken matters into his/her own hands now. It has been disabled. And thanks for clearing things up for me. The coordinates should be accurate (unless it's a puzzle/mystery cache) but the hide itself can be tricky.

 

Just for fun, here is a sample of a cache that I found with bang on coordinates, but a really tricky hide, GC20TFM. That is what makes it fun for me, when you know it's right in front of you, but it's so cleverly hidden that you have to work for it.

 

Hopefully it can be resolved and the cache will be reactivated. I think the CO's heart is in the right place.

 

And thanks for teaching me some new lingo today, "soft coords." Good to know.

[+Panther&Pine]

I looks like the Cache Reviewer has taken matters into his/her own hands now. It has been disabled. And thanks for clearing things up for me. The coordinates should be accurate (unless it's a puzzle/mystery cache) but the hide itself can be tricky.

 

Just for fun, here is a sample of a cache that I found with bang on coordinates, but a really tricky hide, GC20TFM. That is what makes it fun for me, when you know it's right in front of you, but it's so cleverly hidden that you have to work for it.

 

Hopefully it can be resolved and the cache will be reactivated. I think the CO's heart is in the right place.

 

And thanks for teaching me some new lingo today, "soft coords." Good to know.

A point I'd like to make is that coordiantes should always be as accurate as possible, even with mysteries that you solve for coordinants. Mysteries and puzzles just don't have to be at the coordinates on the cache listing- those are place holder coordinants on the map.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Around here the 'softest' coordinates are almost exclusively done by Apple aficionados. I am not certain, but I think their thought process is along the lines of, "I am cool with my iPhone and if the others don't have an iPhone, they deserve to be losers."

 

And then they state that their iPhone was accurate to 60' in the listing. For the cost of one month's service, they can get an eTrex yellow and get to at least 20-30' accuracy!

 

iPhone owner bashing aside, there are two different issues here.

 

To me, "soft coordinates" means that someone has deliberately posted coordinates that are not as accurate as possible as a means to increase the difficulty of the find.

 

If someone has a iPhone or some other device with a GPS which can't produce an accurate waypoint, that is a separate issue. I have found a cache when my Garmin 76Cx was telling me that it was accurate to over 90' and I suspect (because the cache is located in a narrow gorge and was placed in 2001) the original CO wasn't getting better accuracy. However I suspect that she tried to obtain accurate GPS coordinates (as stipulated in the guidelines). There may be environmental and/or equipment constraints that would produce coordinates that are not accurate, but, to me the key point about "soft coordinates" is intent. In fact, I suspect that those that post soft coordinates probably place the cache, then actually walk some distance away from the cache before capturing a waypoint.

[Tahosa and Sons]

He needs to ask his reviewer to change it to a Mystery (if that is possible). A multi has coordinates to the next stage at each location.

Many multis don't give out coordinates for the next stage. And that is what can make a multi a very difficult cache to place and the same can go for the finders.

You need to contact the reviewer and tell them what the story is.

[+Cache O'Plenty]

I've seen where people will place a cache under a large tree or heavy brush area and then step out of the tree cover to get the coordinates (sky view). Well, that just takes you 20-30 feet from the true GZ anyway. In those situations when I'm placing the cache, I'll adjust my coordinates accordingly (usually .001 per 5') to provide coordinates that point to GZ, not to where I took the reading.

 

I shudder when I see iPhone users shooting coordinates.......

[+simpjkee]

The CO placed the cache and mislabeled it as a traditional when it was actually a multi. But this isn't the main concern I have. The final coordinates are not actually at GZ. The CO wanted to place something that was more "difficult" so this was their solution I guess. Of all the caches I have found, the final coordinates have actually brought me to the approx. area of the hide. As you may notice from the history, the final coordinates are a problem, but the CO refuses to fix the issue because they don't want to make it "too easy." Does this make any sense?

 

No, it does not. If the CO wants the final coords to be "off" on purpose, they need to make it a mystery cache. I'd consider contacting a reviewer.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I'd ignore it, just because the cache page gave me a headache!

[+atmospherium]

In reading the cache page and logs, I couldn't really tell if the CO is a sincere hider who just needs some help getting his cache together (and writing a coherant cache page), or some wiseguy teenager messing with the local cachers. Maybe somewhere in between.

 

Anyway, the reviewer has the matter in hand now. But did you notice, the CO has FIVE more hides planned? It's gonna be a fun summer in Ontario. Jenandandy, come on over to New York and do some of our caches. They're easy. Some of them.

[knowschad]

He needs to ask his reviewer to change it to a Mystery (if that is possible). A multi has coordinates to the next stage at each location.

Many multis don't give out coordinates for the next stage.

Please explain. I can't think of a single example (unless you are referring to ones where you need to calculate the next coords from a plaque or something like that)

[jholly]

He needs to ask his reviewer to change it to a Mystery (if that is possible). A multi has coordinates to the next stage at each location.

Many multis don't give out coordinates for the next stage.

Please explain. I can't think of a single example (unless you are referring to ones where you need to calculate the next coords from a plaque or something like that)

 

for example

 

and another example

 

The first one has quite a few stages, the second one is only the final. Neither one requires you to calculate the next coords from a plaque or something. Good thing, they are in the middle of a tree farm with no signs. I've also done ones where you have to find the stage and in the stage is the coords for the next stage.

Edited June 10, 2010 by jholly

[knowschad]

He needs to ask his reviewer to change it to a Mystery (if that is possible). A multi has coordinates to the next stage at each location.

Many multis don't give out coordinates for the next stage.

Please explain. I can't think of a single example (unless you are referring to ones where you need to calculate the next coords from a plaque or something like that)

 

for example

 

and another example

 

The first one has quite a few stages, the second one is only the final. Neither one requires you to calculate the next coords from a plaque or something. Good thing, they are in the middle of a tree farm with no signs. I've also done ones where you have to find the stage and in the stage is the coords for the next stage.

Example #1 is very interesting! I've never seen one anything like that. Example #2 I don't think I can "get" without being there, so can't say much about it.

[+Jenscham]

In reading the cache page and logs, I couldn't really tell if the CO is a sincere hider who just needs some help getting his cache together (and writing a coherant cache page), or some wiseguy teenager messing with the local cachers. Maybe somewhere in between.

 

Anyway, the reviewer has the matter in hand now. But did you notice, the CO has FIVE more hides planned? It's gonna be a fun summer in Ontario. Jenandandy, come on over to New York and do some of our caches. They're easy. Some of them.

 

It's so hard to tell. I think they are sincere. I hope so. It's just so frustrating that he/she ignored all the notes and logs posted and just copped out by suggesting we email and he'll tell us where it is. How is that fun? I know, how about posting the PROPER COORDINATES? Phew. I'm glad I got that out. Anyway, I know I should ignore the cache, but it's the only one in town that I haven't crossed off the list. Until it's fixed/archived, it's going to nag at me

 

And I would love to come to New York and do some caches. I will actually be in NYC in October. Hmmmmm

[+BikeBill]

We have some cachers around here that I'm convinced are consistently using soft coordinates just to make things tougher. They use good gpsr's, as I do, but their caches are very often 30-40 feet away from my GZ. Not a big deal in a field, but a big deal in a thicket.

 

Also, I'm not an Apple fan but do have an iPhone. I wouldn't even consider using it to set up a cache's coordinates as it's way too inaccurate. I decided to try for a cache the other day using the thing and had no luck. I went back later with my Garmin to find the iPhone was about 60 feet off. The iPhone is really handy for calling up descriptions, logs and hints in the field, though.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

He needs to ask his reviewer to change it to a Mystery (if that is possible). A multi has coordinates to the next stage at each location.

Many multis don't give out coordinates for the next stage.

Please explain. I can't think of a single example (unless you are referring to ones where you need to calculate the next coords from a plaque or something like that)

 

How about an offset cache. The container at a stage might contains something like "project a waypoint at 270 degrees and 340 feet" to find the next stage.

 

Multi caches where one has to count a certain number of objects, or obtain a number from a sign or gravestone and plug numbers in to derive a subsequent stage are extremely common. Typically, one is given a coordinate such as N42 26.ABC and asked to "count the number of flags in front of the building" for A, take the last number of the phone number for B, etc. Others might ask to obtain a number that is added or subtracted to the published coordinates. To me, if any of the calculations or tasks that need to be performed are more compliated than basic arithmetic it should probably be classified as a puzzle rather than a multi. For example, asking someone to plug in some numbers for ABC is one thing, but obtaining numbers that need to be plugged into a differential equation to solve for X and Y is, to me, a puzzle.