The Newest World Record

[+sbell111]

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

That cracked me up. I haven't seen that term used in days.

 

I wonder if there would be any interest to establish UNOFFICIAL speed caching guidelines to cut down on the disagreements as to what is a legitimate tactic.

I thought that's what VK did prior to his record run, but I don't remember "You can't take the cache with you" being on his list of rules.

[+Ecylram]

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

That cracked me up. I haven't seen that term used in days.

 

I wonder if there would be any interest to establish UNOFFICIAL speed caching guidelines to cut down on the disagreements as to what is a legitimate tactic.

I thought that's what VK did prior to his record run, but I don't remember "You can't take the cache with you" being on his list of rules.

I might have missed that post. I think it would be a good idea to setup some kind of unofficial standard so we can compare apples to apples on these runs.

 

For example, a time or quantity record set by leapfrogging team would have a huge advantage over a one-vehicle team.

[knowschad]

I'm inclined to believe that finding 122 caches per hour... Even on the ET Power Trail... Has to be impossible. That's one cache per slightly-under 30 seconds. If you just had to FIND the cache, that would be highly unlikely, but with the time it takes for EACH of you to sign the log?

 

I just don't think it's possible... Unless I'm missing something.

I just timed myself while I went over to the coffee station in my office and filling my cup with the pump-style caraffe. Four pumps to fill my cup. I also paced off the steps. It was 25 steps each way, round-trip. Took me 27 seconds. Good coffee, though.

[knowschad]

Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

Well, hey... isn't that how we all cache? Take the log out of the first cache and drop it into the next, sign while walking down the trail... that's perfectly normal, isn't it?

[+sbell111]

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

That cracked me up. I haven't seen that term used in days.

 

I wonder if there would be any interest to establish UNOFFICIAL speed caching guidelines to cut down on the disagreements as to what is a legitimate tactic.

I thought that's what VK did prior to his record run, but I don't remember "You can't take the cache with you" being on his list of rules.

I might have missed that post. I think it would be a good idea to setup some kind of unofficial standard so we can compare apples to apples on these runs.

 

For example, a time or quantity record set by leapfrogging team would have a huge advantage over a one-vehicle team.

I think that it was discussed in this thread.

[+JohnnyVegas]

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

 

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)

* The driver remains behind the wheel

* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.

* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ

* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.

* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.

* Dive back into the car.

* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

 

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.

If they are moving the cache then it is a crap find, I thought moving caches were not allowed. Maybe all the caches along the route should be archived.

Edited November 8, 2010 by JohnnyVegas

[knowschad]

The vehicle:

 

 

Seriously, guys... congrats. While *I think* that the E.T. powertrail methods are totally bogus, you are all playing on the same totally bogus field, so if you did it in better time than someone else playing on that same field, good for you. You beat them.

[+Sol seaker]

Personally I can't see that this really matters very much in any way.

 

Neither the method used or the fact a record was set really matter to me.

 

Both really just matter to the one doing it, just like all caching.

 

Are you having fun? Well good then. That's what we're here for.

 

Do you need high numbers to have fun? Well then I hope you're getting them.

 

Do you prefer to find one very difficult cache in an entire day? Well I hope you will always find your adventure then.

 

We're just here for fun. There are few rules, and many make new ones up all the time.

 

What does it really matter? There are still the same number of staving people in the world and no one died.

 

Go out, find a geocache (or a thousand) and have fun.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

While *I think* that the E.T. powertrail methods are totally bogus, you are all playing on the same totally bogus field, so if you did it in better time than someone else playing on that same field, good for you. You beat them.

 

Speedcaching is sort of like the FTF subset of geocaching. Some players really get into it and it becomes an obsession. The rest of us (most of us) just don't care and are willing to let you play the game the way you want.

Since speedcaching, as briansnat put it, "isn't geocaching as I know it", I see no problem with leap-frogging, cache switching, log swaps, stickers, sharpies or whatever other method they can dream up to shave a few seconds off each stop and proclaim themselves the World Record title holder. Have at it as long as you enjoy it.

[knowschad]

While *I think* that the E.T. powertrail methods are totally bogus, you are all playing on the same totally bogus field, so if you did it in better time than someone else playing on that same field, good for you. You beat them.

 

Speedcaching is sort of like the FTF subset of geocaching. Some players really get into it and it becomes an obsession. The rest of us (most of us) just don't care and are willing to let you play the game the way you want.

Since speedcaching, as briansnat put it, "isn't geocaching as I know it", I see no problem with leap-frogging, cache switching, log swaps, stickers, sharpies or whatever other method they can dream up to shave a few seconds off each stop and proclaim themselves the World Record title holder. Have at it as long as you enjoy it.

 

I think the next record will be broken by somebody using a motorcycle and sidecar:

 

 

[+JohnnyVegas]

While *I think* that the E.T. powertrail methods are totally bogus, you are all playing on the same totally bogus field, so if you did it in better time than someone else playing on that same field, good for you. You beat them.

 

Speedcaching is sort of like the FTF subset of geocaching. Some players really get into it and it becomes an obsession. The rest of us (most of us) just don't care and are willing to let you play the game the way you want.

Since speedcaching, as briansnat put it, "isn't geocaching as I know it", I see no problem with leap-frogging, cache switching, log swaps, stickers, sharpies or whatever other method they can dream up to shave a few seconds off each stop and proclaim themselves the World Record title holder. Have at it as long as you enjoy it.

THe problem with leap frogging is that not all the cachers in the group are looking for all the caches they are claiming to have found. That wouyld be like someone sitting at home and having a freind go out and find caches for them and stamp thier name in with a rubber stamp. Kind of like when a groups splits up if multiple directions with stamp that have all the names of the cachers on them.

I have even seen high numbers cachers place cache containers after looking for a few minutes. Some of the old timers in the forums may recall a so called world record run texas a few yyears ago when a group of cacher just wrote or stamped their names on the outside of the caches so they woyuld have to take the time to open them up.

Geocaching world record runs are just BS

[Clan Riffster]

While *I think* that the E.T. powertrail methods are totally bogus, you are all playing on the same totally bogus field, so if you did it in better time than someone else playing on that same field, good for you. You beat them.

Actually, since bogusness, (is that a word?), is the acceptable standard now, as otherwise completely unacceptable practices are not only allowed, they are apparently encouraged, I would think that the guy who "found" the cache 3000+ times in an hour by rapid blinking still holds the record.

[+the4dirtydogs]

While *I think* that the E.T. powertrail methods are totally bogus, you are all playing on the same totally bogus field, so if you did it in better time than someone else playing on that same field, good for you. You beat them.

 

Speedcaching is sort of like the FTF subset of geocaching. Some players really get into it and it becomes an obsession. The rest of us (most of us) just don't care and are willing to let you play the game the way you want.

Since speedcaching, as briansnat put it, "isn't geocaching as I know it", I see no problem with leap-frogging, cache switching, log swaps, stickers, sharpies or whatever other method they can dream up to shave a few seconds off each stop and proclaim themselves the World Record title holder. Have at it as long as you enjoy it.

 

I think the next record will be broken by somebody using a motorcycle and sidecar:

 

 

Thats what I'm talking about. You drive and I'll grab this caches.

[MisterEFQ]

I dont get the "take the cache to the next location and swap" method. So after you are done you have to drive all the way back to the first instance you started doing that to put back that cache. So #1000 becomes #1.

 

That sucks for the other people that might be out there that day.

[+Castle Mischief]

Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

Well, hey... isn't that how we all cache? Take the log out of the first cache and drop it into the next, sign while walking down the trail... that's perfectly normal, isn't it?

 

Sure, I do that all the time.

 

What this thread needs now is a Dave Ulmer quote that can somehow be construed as support for this practice. Heck, I'll just provide one and save us all the time and effort.

 

"Whatever, man." - Dave Ulmer

 

 

I'd love to "debate" if this "practice" "violates" the "rules" of Geocaching or the "spirit" of the "hobby" but I've got to get home early and perfect my log "signing" shotgun. I'm changing my caching name to an artistic symbol that resembles the spread pattern of a .20 gauge shotgun using buck shot fired a distance of about 20 feet away from inside a vehicle moving at 30 MPH.

 

World record, here I come. Who's laughing now???

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I dont get the "take the cache to the next location and swap" method. So after you are done you have to drive all the way back to the first instance you started doing that to put back that cache. So #1000 becomes #1.

 

That sucks for the other people that might be out there that day.

 

I think they have a film can with a clean log sheet with their sigs on it. They drop that and grab the one that's there. Ad nauseum. Emphasis on the nauseum.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

One thing I want to know, is how do we know that the runs were all made within 24 hours?

 

Yes, we could trust them, but most "world records" have officials officiating over them. While there is proof that the caches were all signed (if one wanted to go and check), there's no "proof" of the time element.

 

Perhaps these record runs need to be video taped with a running timer.

 

This would also prove the ability to get from one cache to the next, open it, log it, close it and return it at the rate of 60-120 per hour (or 1 every 30-60 seconds). Even if someone were to film that evolution for an hour (60-120 caches) it might be enough evidence to silence some of the doubters.

[+Scubasonic]

 

Scubasonic

[jholly]

I understand that there is a bot warming up right now to set a new worlds record that will be hard to beat.

[+Ecylram]

One thing I want to know, is how do we know that the runs were all made within 24 hours?

 

Yes, we could trust them, but most "world records" have officials officiating over them. While there is proof that the caches were all signed (if one wanted to go and check), there's no "proof" of the time element.

 

Perhaps these record runs need to be video taped with a running timer.

 

This would also prove the ability to get from one cache to the next, open it, log it, close it and return it at the rate of 60-120 per hour (or 1 every 30-60 seconds). Even if someone were to film that evolution for an hour (60-120 caches) it might be enough evidence to silence some of the doubters.

Trust is a big part of this game at ALL levels.

[+SK6 Blue]

I cant believe a CO would suggest/condone the mass movement of caches.... to count them as separate caches the caches should be distinct to their location[and i'm not saying they need unique containers], but that a cache and its log actually match the cache and GCcode online.

 

seems like many including the cache owner are treating this like a bastardized multi and not a power trail of caches.

 

maybe switchable caches should be a new cache type, but after hearing that the CO actually promotes the movement and switching of caches and the logs, i kind of want to see if there is a way to have these caches archived, as it seems not one individual cache has been maintained as the cache it was published

 

SO OUT OF CURIOSITY, would anyone else be in favor of a swichable cache type ... and if that happened maybe not count it towards the .1mile rule for other caches, so that powertrails of this nature dont just eliminate people from being able to place and MAINTAIN an individual well thought out cache

[+Jumpin' Jack Cache]

 

Scubasonic

 

Waiting to see which way the wind blows before admitting to doing the "cache container shuffle"?

 

Looks to me like it's blowing toward a big reset on the past few "New World Records".

 

Blast away.

[+geodarts]

One thing I want to know, is how do we know that the runs were all made within 24 hours?

 

Yes, we could trust them, but most "world records" have officials officiating over them. While there is proof that the caches were all signed (if one wanted to go and check), there's no "proof" of the time element.

 

Perhaps these record runs need to be video taped with a running timer.

 

This would also prove the ability to get from one cache to the next, open it, log it, close it and return it at the rate of 60-120 per hour (or 1 every 30-60 seconds). Even if someone were to film that evolution for an hour (60-120 caches) it might be enough evidence to silence some of the doubters.

Trust is a big part of this game at ALL levels.

 

But world records are not an official part of this game. And trust only goes so far: I am not sure that I would trust anybody who logged two thousand caches from around the world with "Greetings from Fairfax." Particularly considering that Platinum members are not on the same level playing field as some others, then how are we to judge? Until there are verifiable standards, owner confirmation of each find, referees in place, a frog at each cache, drug testing, or a comprehensive body that oversees geocaching records that is recognized by the World Council, I am willing to let anyone claim any record they want. If different people want to claim some sort of record using different methods, fine by me. For that matter, if they all want to say they are First to Find, I have no problem with it. Let everybody claim whatever they want. So I still claim the record for the most ET finds and earthcache finds and a great Mexican dinner within a 12 hour period -- and I added a Phil "the Power" Taylor sighting within a 14 hour period. So that must surely be a record.

Edited November 9, 2010 by mulvaney

[knowschad]

 

Scubasonic

Shouldn't each one be feeding the popcorn to the next signal down the line?

[+tozainamboku]

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

 

In my opinion, it is appropriate to call one of these runs a 'world record' if standard rules were applied to the run. However, moving the cache and signing the log while enroute to the next cache would violate these standard rules. Therefore, these types of runs should not be considered by the community to be 'world records'. The reason that I take this stance is because it would be impossible for a team that did utilize standard geocaching practices (hide the cache like you found it, for example) to match the speeds that can be acquired by a team that merely swaps one cache container for another at ground zero, rather than taking the time to open the cache, remove the log, and sticker/stamp the log.

 

Similar to the run in which the outside of the cache containers were sharpied instead of the logs signed, these record runs should not be accepted by the community.

I think the unwritten rule that we all agree on is to is to leave the cache so the next finder can have the same experience as you had (or as close as possible given that like Heraclitus stepping in a river, you can't find the same cache twice). Now for a normal cache, if you take the cache and leave a throw down replacement you are likely to significantly alter the experience for the next geocacher. But here we are talking about a long series of caches using identical containers. Moving the containers from one location to the next doesn't significantly alter the experience of the other cachers - except for the first container. There the next finder will open the container to see he is only second to find. The rest of the containers will have the signatures of all those that came before - at least until the next person takes the first container and moves it to the second. And so on. Also if someone did a part of the series and came back to finish after a cacher using this method, they might find a cache that already had their signature in it. My guess, though, is that people finding these caches are not checking the logs though and don't really care if they found the original container in the original place or found the container that used to be in a different location. They probably don't care much if they find a throw down that someone left to replace a missing cache. People who decide to do the ET trail are simply having fun looking for caches and perhaps trying to find them as fast as they can and could care less if the caches are playing musical chairs.

 

I mentioned in a different thread that it seems some puritans seem to think there is a rule that you shouldn't log a find online if you didn't find the cache the owner left in the location and instead were finding a throw down or one that had migrated from a different location. I think it is overthinking geocaching to get concerned about this. I suggested, however, that if the website that was promoting cache replacement wanted, they could improve it a little by suggesting that the replacement caches be labeled so puritans would know not to log a find on these. I suppose that on the ET trail one could stamp that the cache was moved and the puritans would know not to look for them

[+Klondike Mike]

I would like to hear more about how you did it? The actual process.

 

For example, did all four cachers attend at each cache while it was found and signed? Did you sign/stamp the log book or use a sticker? Did you put the sticker on the log book or outside of the container?

 

How many miles? Any DNF's?

 

Most of the caches are within 30' of the car. We had a driver, two runners and a stamper(on the logs).

Not sure how many miles we covered as I forgot to check the odometer the next morning. As far as DNF's all of ET caches were in place including 2 we found at one location. Before that we got about 170 of the 200 in the musical series in Cedar City. Some of those we just chose not to do though.

 

 

Scubasonic

 

Waiting to see which way the wind blows before admitting to doing the "cache container shuffle"?

 

Looks to me like it's blowing toward a big reset on the past few "New World Records".

 

Blast away.

 

Looks like legoboy let the cat out of the bag on that one

[+The Leprechauns]

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

 

In my opinion, it is appropriate to call one of these runs a 'world record' if standard rules were applied to the run. However, moving the cache and signing the log while enroute to the next cache would violate these standard rules. Therefore, these types of runs should not be considered by the community to be 'world records'. The reason that I take this stance is because it would be impossible for a team that did utilize standard geocaching practices (hide the cache like you found it, for example) to match the speeds that can be acquired by a team that merely swaps one cache container for another at ground zero, rather than taking the time to open the cache, remove the log, and sticker/stamp the log.

"Shuffling" identical containers with the owner's consent was fine in your own hometown more than five years ago, albeit on a far smaller scale. I cannot decide whether to be surprised that you didn't know that or to award you the GeoOscar for Best Supporting Actor in a GeoDrama.

[+M 5]

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

 

In my opinion, it is appropriate to call one of these runs a 'world record' if standard rules were applied to the run. However, moving the cache and signing the log while enroute to the next cache would violate these standard rules. Therefore, these types of runs should not be considered by the community to be 'world records'. The reason that I take this stance is because it would be impossible for a team that did utilize standard geocaching practices (hide the cache like you found it, for example) to match the speeds that can be acquired by a team that merely swaps one cache container for another at ground zero, rather than taking the time to open the cache, remove the log, and sticker/stamp the log.

 

Similar to the run in which the outside of the cache containers were sharpied instead of the logs signed, these record runs should not be accepted by the community.

I think the unwritten rule that we all agree on is to is to leave the cache so the next finder can have the same experience as you had (or as close as possible given that like Heraclitus stepping in a river, you can't find the same cache twice). Now for a normal cache, if you take the cache and leave a throw down replacement you are likely to significantly alter the experience for the next geocacher. But here we are talking about a long series of caches using identical containers. Moving the containers from one location to the next doesn't significantly alter the experience of the other cachers - except for the first container. There the next finder will open the container to see he is only second to find. The rest of the containers will have the signatures of all those that came before - at least until the next person takes the first container and moves it to the second. And so on. Also if someone did a part of the series and came back to finish after a cacher using this method, they might find a cache that already had their signature in it. My guess, though, is that people finding these caches are not checking the logs though and don't really care if they found the original container in the original place or found the container that used to be in a different location. They probably don't care much if they find a throw down that someone left to replace a missing cache. People who decide to do the ET trail are simply having fun looking for caches and perhaps trying to find them as fast as they can and could care less if the caches are playing musical chairs.

 

I mentioned in a different thread that it seems some puritans seem to think there is a rule that you shouldn't log a find online if you didn't find the cache the owner left in the location and instead were finding a throw down or one that had migrated from a different location. I think it is overthinking geocaching to get concerned about this. I suggested, however, that if the website that was promoting cache replacement wanted, they could improve it a little by suggesting that the replacement caches be labeled so puritans would know not to log a find on these. I suppose that on the ET trail one could stamp that the cache was moved and the puritans would know not to look for them

 

I think tozainamboku is the "power trail" of forum posters. Similar geo-spew over and over and over and over.

[+TerraViators]

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

 

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)

* The driver remains behind the wheel

* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.

* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ

* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.

* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.

* Dive back into the car.

* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

 

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.

Doesn't this method place the wrong logs at each stop? So, the logs are not accurate for each GZ? What if someone only found every other cache? Now, the log would reflect that they found every other cache that they actually did not find.

[+narcissa]

 

I think tozainamboku is the "power trail" of forum posters. Similar geo-spew over and over and over and over.

 

The major difference is that some cachers actually like power trails.

[+Mudfrog]

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

 

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)

* The driver remains behind the wheel

* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.

* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ

* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.

* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.

* Dive back into the car.

* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

 

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.

Doesn't this method place the wrong logs at each stop? So, the logs are not accurate for each GZ? What if someone only found every other cache? Now, the log would reflect that they found every other cache that they actually did not find.

 

That's one of the problems i see. I might find a few of these caches one day then come back on another day to find some more. When i did come back, i wouldn't expect to see my name on the log of a cache that i hadn't found yet. I do try to keep my found and unfound caches straight, but something like this might cause me to have doubts on whether i screwed up and actually found the cache.

 

Imo, this "shuffling" of caches can affect other cachers and shouldn't be done.

[+SK6 Blue]

 

I think tozainamboku is the "power trail" of forum posters. Similar geo-spew over and over and over and over.

 

The major difference is that some cachers actually like power trails.

 

so basicly this power trail shouldn't have logs, there would be no difference between what is being done now and sticking a sticker to the outside of an empty film canister .. either way no individual cache log can be tracked at present....

 

i really wonder why no one has epoxyed the containers in place yet

Edited November 9, 2010 by SK6 Blue

[knowschad]

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

 

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)

* The driver remains behind the wheel

* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.

* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ

* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.

* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.

* Dive back into the car.

* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

 

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.

Doesn't this method place the wrong logs at each stop? So, the logs are not accurate for each GZ? What if someone only found every other cache? Now, the log would reflect that they found every other cache that they actually did not find.

 

Yes, you bet it does. Particularly for the first on either end. But it doesn't really matter... nobody is checking those logs.

[+Setan Meyacha]

I'm hoping to do the ET series next year, but I have no intention of doing it in a 24 hr period. After seeing the video I can see how it might be done in that time span, but I sure don't approve of taking the cache with you to sign/stamp/whatever on the way to the next one. Are not all the caches numbered? And even if they aren't, it just seems wrong to me to be taking a cache from one location to another, whether in the name of setting a record or not. JMHO

[vagabond]

I'm just glad someone relegated VK to second place

But for how long???????????????????????????????????????????????

[+Pax42]

Don't see much difference in swapping logs along the trail and just taking along 1200 film cans with pre-stamped logs ready to take their place. I have no problem with people wanting to play the game this way but I really think it should be called something other than geocaching.

[+narcissa]

You know, before this thread, I thought these numbers runs were lame, but otherwise uninteresting.

 

This practice of switching caches? It's disgusting.

 

It is time for Groundspeak to realize they've made a serious mistake and shut down these "power trails" for good.

[+roziecakes]

Congratulations you guys!! I'm so impressed! YAY Oregon cachers are totally hardcore!! I am a little disappointed to hear about the driving of the alien head... but maybe you didn't know you weren't supposed to.

[+myotis]

Rain or Shine, Zsteve, Scubasonic & Legoboyjj

ET Highway Record Run

11/5/2010

1270 Finds

 

Hour 1: 24

Hour 2: 33

Hour 3: 30

Hour 4: 20

Hour 5: 32

Hour 6: 31

Hour 7: 0

Hour 8: 0

Hour 9: 4

Hour 10: 103

Hour 11: 96

Hour 12: 122

Hour 13: 68

Hour 14: 67

Hour 15: 110

Hour 16: 54 w/ break - let breaks cool down

Hour 17: 98

Hour 18:103

Hour 19: 111

Hour 20: 91

Hour 21: 66

Hour 22: 7

Hour 23: 0

Hour 24: 0

Total = 1270

 

21hours 45minutes caching and driving

 

ET Run & Alien Head plus 20 others in 11hours 45minutes

 

We started in Cedar City, Utah and ended the day in Tonopah, Nevada.

 

We could not have done this without the fifth member of our team Legoboy's 4 Runner. We had to take a short break at one point and slow

down a couple of times to allow the breaks to cool off as they were not doing the job.

 

This was a great area to visit with awesome landscapes and views.

 

We really appreciate all the cache hiders for all the work that went into placing these caches.

 

Can't wait for the next big power trail to come out.

 

-legoboyjj

 

Sorry, you are in second place for finding the lamest way posible to claim a find.

 

I beat all you number hounds in your race to the bottom and made 3,500 finds in an hour.

 

You cheated-You cannot get much lower than claiming a "world record" by counting finds someone else made while you sat in the car. Geez! you would think as easy as the caches were there would not be a need for cheating! For my world record, I made all the finds and did not cheat.

 

Myotis

World Record Holder for most finds in a day

[+JohnnyVegas]

 

I think tozainamboku is the "power trail" of forum posters. Similar geo-spew over and over and over and over.

 

The major difference is that some cachers actually like power trails.

Myselff, I do not have a problem with power trails. But I do have a problem with the way some cachers go about claiming record runs when only some of the group gets out to look but they all claim the finds.

Just as I have problems with leao-frogging and using duplicate rubber stamps. Like I have said in the past.

Believing this record runs are on the up and up is like beleiving in the tooth fairy

[+sbell111]

I'd love to "debate" if this "practice" "violates" the "rules" of Geocaching or the "spirit" of the "hobby" but I've got to get home early and perfect my log "signing" shotgun. I'm changing my caching name to an artistic symbol that resembles the spread pattern of a .20 gauge shotgun using buck shot fired a distance of about 20 feet away from inside a vehicle moving at 30 MPH.

 

World record, here I come. Who's laughing now???

I know who won't be laughing: you and anyone else who is sitting inside the car when you fire the shotgun.

[+sbell111]

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

 

In my opinion, it is appropriate to call one of these runs a 'world record' if standard rules were applied to the run. However, moving the cache and signing the log while enroute to the next cache would violate these standard rules. Therefore, these types of runs should not be considered by the community to be 'world records'. The reason that I take this stance is because it would be impossible for a team that did utilize standard geocaching practices (hide the cache like you found it, for example) to match the speeds that can be acquired by a team that merely swaps one cache container for another at ground zero, rather than taking the time to open the cache, remove the log, and sticker/stamp the log.

"Shuffling" identical containers with the owner's consent was fine in your own hometown more than five years ago, albeit on a far smaller scale. I cannot decide whether to be surprised that you didn't know that or to award you the GeoOscar for Best Supporting Actor in a GeoDrama.

I was not aware of that practice until it was mentioned in this thread.

 

The mere fact that I live in the general area where questionable acts occurred doesn't mean that I was aware of or supported those acts. Further, five years ago, I was mostly not caching as I was in the midst of a long recovery due to my accident and subsequent surgeries.

 

BTW, are you suggesting that you utilized this method during your record run?

Edited November 9, 2010 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

I wonder how many of these records were made using the 'three card monty' method.

...

Here is a list of past records we found (I've added a few additional records that cachers sent to me).

1157 (24 hrs) - Monday, Sept 27, 2010 - Alamo, Nevada - Foomanjoo, F0T0M0M, ventura_kids

1105 - (1 Day 8:20AM - 6:45PM) - July 31, 2010 - Nevada - FlagMan, devhead, AS73, SD-Weiss, Thunder-4, Ragfoot

1045 ( 1 day) - Nevada - Sept 7, 2010 - Night-Hawk, Featheredfriends, WE4NCS, CacheUMan

1021 - (1 Day) - July 14, 2010 - Nevada - Triple Crown, Duncan!, lulu499, snflwrmh

737 - (1 Day) - July 7, 2010 - Nevada - tite lines

695 (1 Day) - Friday, April 16, 2010 - Nevada\California - legoboyjj, Rain or Shine, ZSteve

566 - March 26, 2010 - Nevada\California - ventura_kids, f0t0m0m, Cachepal

480 - December 28, 2009 - Denmark\Sweden - Picht, Elmbaek

413 (1 Day) - August 29, 2009 - Colorado - ventura_kids, f0t0m0m, EMC of Northridge, CA

409 - May 9, 2009 - Colorado - dndsterns, chefstern, ColoradoOB

315 (24 hrs) - May 18, 2008 - Sacramento, California - Elmbaek, Schuleit, gjensen, Picht, tottommy, Sjanten, Zooor

312 (24 hrs) - May 20, 2006 - Texas - geoPirat, m.zielinski, darth_maul_3, spuchtfink, Cache & Keri

263 (24 hrs) - May 22, 2005 - Jacksonville, Florida - geoPirat, Huskie

246 (24 hrs) - October 24, 2004 - Jacksonville, Florida - CaptDC52, Luke11.9, Zatoichi

240 (24 hrs) - July 4, 2004 - Nashville, Tennessee - The Leprechauns, carleenp

238 (24 hrs) - September 14, 2003 - Nashville, Tennessee - fullct

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

I watched the video that showed the alien trail being done and the one thing that jumped out at me was the fact that there were no caches being found. Containers, yes, but NO caches!

 

From the GC homepage "The basic idea is to locate hidden containers, called geocaches". None of the containers were "hidden" so they fail to meet the definition of what a cache is.

 

For a real speed record on finding 'containers' have someone do a large 'multi-cache'. They can place the containers close together, since the 528' rule would not apply to the stages of the multi cache.

 

You folks earned the world record for picking up the most containers in that time period, but not for 'finding' any caches in that power trail along the alien highway.

 

Well done for getting that many containers.

 

John

 

PS: That wasn't caching, that was "containering".

Edited November 9, 2010 by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders)

[+sbell111]

I watched the video that showed the alien trail being done and the one thing that jumped out at me was the fact that there were no caches being found. Containers, yes, but NO caches!

 

From the GC homepage "The basic idea is to locate hidden containers, called geocaches". None of the containers were "hidden" so they fail to meet the definition of what a cache is.

I suspect that you are using a definition of 'hidden' that varies from the standard for geocaching. Many perfectly acceptable geocaches are in plain view.

[+addisonbr]

"Shuffling" identical containers with the owner's consent was fine in [Tennessee] more than five years ago, albeit on a far smaller scale.

This was before my time, but it sounds like it may be an interesting story / episode. Can you shed further light on what happened?

[hoosier guy]

Sounds like fun and I'd like to give it a try sometime. But it isn't really caching to my way of thinking. But we all play the game our own way don't we?

[+elrojo14]

All of you haters crack me up. Why does anyone care what these power cachers do on a desolate road in the middle of freaking nowhere? Geocaching is a huge sport with tons of different facets. If they want to create a power trail and then run it over and over again, let them. It isn't hurting anyone.

 

What it really boils down to is some people must really want to have the most caches in a day or the highest numbers or some such nonsense. I have over 1500 caches. I will never be at the top and I don't care. I cache for my own personal reasons and I enjoy it.

 

That is the beauty of Geocaching that so many of you are forgetting. Do your own thing. I hate urban light pole skirts and urban bush hides. However, people clearly like to plant them. I simply skip them. That is all you have to do. I don't get all butthurt and say they aren't Geocaching. If one of you wanted to set the world's record for most light pole skirt and bush caches in a day, that is your thing. I don't care.

 

I currently hold the world record for most Geocaches found in the Carrizo Plain while armed with an AR15 and a Glock 27. I even took pictures to prove it.

 

Who cares? Get on you with you lives and unless you live in the middle of this power cache trail and these caches are murking up your local caching, move on. Oh wait, no one lives out there! Who cares?

 

Congrats on your new record. My next goal is to find this cache.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...8f-12a4617bff2b

 

Your goal might be to find this cache.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...f1-f4d9b1295947

 

I want to bicycle to a hundred caches in a day. Maybe I will set the first record to find the entire ET series by bicylce by myself.

 

To each their own. Just go out and enjoy our sport.

Edited November 9, 2010 by elrojo14

[+Castle Mischief]

I'd love to "debate" if this "practice" "violates" the "rules" of Geocaching or the "spirit" of the "hobby" but I've got to get home early and perfect my log "signing" shotgun. I'm changing my caching name to an artistic symbol that resembles the spread pattern of a .20 gauge shotgun using buck shot fired a distance of about 20 feet away from inside a vehicle moving at 30 MPH.

 

World record, here I come. Who's laughing now???

I know who won't be laughing: you and anyone else who is sitting inside the car when you fire the shotgun.

 

HILARIOUS!

[+Castle Mischief]

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

 

In my opinion, it is appropriate to call one of these runs a 'world record' if standard rules were applied to the run. However, moving the cache and signing the log while enroute to the next cache would violate these standard rules. Therefore, these types of runs should not be considered by the community to be 'world records'. The reason that I take this stance is because it would be impossible for a team that did utilize standard geocaching practices (hide the cache like you found it, for example) to match the speeds that can be acquired by a team that merely swaps one cache container for another at ground zero, rather than taking the time to open the cache, remove the log, and sticker/stamp the log.

"Shuffling" identical containers with the owner's consent was fine in your own hometown more than five years ago, albeit on a far smaller scale. I cannot decide whether to be surprised that you didn't know that or to award you the GeoOscar for Best Supporting Actor in a GeoDrama.

I was not aware of that practice until it was mentioned in this thread.

 

The mere fact that I live in the general area where questionable acts occurred doesn't mean that I was aware of or supported those acts. Further, five years ago, I was mostly not caching as I was in the midst of a long recovery due to my accident and subsequent surgeries.

 

BTW, are you suggesting that you utilized this method during your record run?

 

THE PLOT THICKENS!!!