Is your favourite a virtual ?

[+jonnyt]

In a pondering moment, what has surprised me is the number of virtuals at the top of the favourite lists.

 

From my home location if i search 10, 20, 40 miles the "biggest" favourite is always a virtual (and yes they are different ones) indeed the 40 mile search has 6 virtuals and an earth cache in the top 10 (there are 1892 in total so lots to choose from), the top 4 are 3 virts and the earth cache.

 

not sure what it shows, may be more people do virtuals, may be they have been round a while so they have more chance of being remembered, may be that actually it doesnt really matter one jot as long as people enjoy it

 

and may be i need to get to ripon at 9pm to enjoy the top rated one

[+geodarts]

Most of the caches that are the favorites of my favorites are either virtuals or earthcaches. In part, this is because the location and the over-all experience is more important to me than the search for a container. It is hard to beat places like Stonehenge, barrows, standing stones, and the 16th Century Pub that I enjoyed on a cold winter day. In my country, virtuals and earthcaches in places like Yosemite, Zion, Bryce, the Grand Canyon, and the Olympic Peninsula stand out for their locations. But one of my all time favorites is a rather nondescript traditional cache that brought me to one of the most stunning locations I have ever visited. If I had found that cache in my neighborhood I would have quickly forgotten it. But put it on a peak high above Machu Picchu and it is a favorite.

 

In some respects virtuals and earthcaches might be popular because they are easier to identify when traveling. I go out of my way for them, where I might not notice a traditional outside of the immediate area we are visiting. If the 16tth Century Pub had a micro in front of it, I might have missed it.

 

Locally, most of the favorites on my list are traditionals because I have had time to track them down and discover many special places. Perhaps the favorites list will help me to identify some of the special traditionals that I would have otherwise missed when traveling.

Edited December 31, 2010 by mulvaney

[+Simply Paul]

My favourite isn't a virtual (usually; what counts as my 'all time favourite cache' tends to change for me depending on lots of factors) but many of my favourites are. In alphabetical order:

 

16th Century Pub (Central London) by The Wombles - Classic London Meet location

 

A bit of......... by Chris & Mary B - Birmingham landmark

 

Ancient Vandalism by Naefearjustbeer + Sparky the dog - Cool virt in a Scottish cave

 

Avebury Stone Circle (Wilts) by The Wombles - Another historic spot

 

Barcelona by Yellow Jacket and Lectro - Overlooking the city; a stunning location

 

Cache my Czech (Prague) by CARGOLAX - Charming

 

Catastrophe, Calamity, Cataclysm Part 2 by rodz (adopted from Daoloth & Tuna) - Atop The Monument. 311 steps...

 

David's Autumn Wardrobe by rodz (with a booster from the evilrooster) - Classic London Museum cache

 

direction southpole by rafter (Germany) - Unexpected viewpoint in a quirky park

 

Dunnet Forest by Naefearjustbeer & Caitlin - A random Scottish woodland. Pretty though

 

Early Flyer (Cap Blanc Nez) by Rovi Ratuos - Historic

 

Electric Brae by Pooter - Very neat 'Gravity Hill'; indeed, the 'original' one in the UK

 

End of the Holiday by Wilkinsons - On my list for personal reasons

 

Face it, you're stumped! (Devon) by Stuey - An accidental find

 

Fly By (Bucks) by Dan and Pid (adopted by Alibags) - An oldie but a goodie

 

Funny Faces (Galloway) by John Stead - One of my all time favourite bizarre discoveries, in Scotland

 

Going in Deep [E Yorks] by John Stead - Hull visitor attraction

 

In the Court of King Mathias by Fôtérképész - Underground location in Budapest

 

Me and the Houses of Parliament... and Irene by MTA and Fõtérképész (Budapest) - Neat photo op virt.

 

Paddington Dare (W London) by Chris n Maria - Cute statue of a childhood hero

 

Royal Observatory Greenwich Cache by MiketheFiddler - Kind of obvious inculsion

 

Scafell Pike – a cache to peak them all by Sandstorm - England's highest cache

 

Silbury Hill, Avebury (Wiltshire) by The Wombles - Who doesn't love a manmade hill?

 

Statue, Chapel, Cross by jalso (Budapest) - Underground church included; very snazzy.

 

Stiffy By The Liffey by Donnacha (Dublin) - Landmark worth a visit

 

Stonehenge by Northern Trekker - Obvious

 

Sweet Fanny Adams by Grrlfrog - Amazing snippet of folk history

 

Tabloid Tombstone by mgrainger - Horrific railway story!

 

The Palace of Westminster (Houses of Parliament) by The Wombles - Some unexpected history

 

The Stonegate Devil by harrypotter (York) - Something you might otherwise walk right past & a good story

 

University Challenge 5 (munch munch) by 2202 (Oxford) - Landmark shark!

 

University Challenge 7 (Sizzle Sizzle) by 2202 (Oxford) - Crispy history

 

View from Gellért hill by CHRIS69 (Budapest) - Great high-level virt

 

Wedding Cake In"spire"ation by 2Plus3 - A classic London architecture virt

 

West Kennett Longbarrow (Wilts) by The Wombles - Historic

 

Where is Snowdon Summit??? by Gamma Boo - Wales' highest geocache

 

Whisky Galore (S London) by kimrobin - A boating bit of history

 

Ye Ole Survey Monuments - Outwood by outforthehunt (several times) - The ultimate UK roving cache for lovers of trig points

[+mollyjak]

In a pondering moment, what has surprised me is the number of virtuals at the top of the favourite lists.

 

From my home location if i search 10, 20, 40 miles the "biggest" favourite is always a virtual (and yes they are different ones) indeed the 40 mile search has 6 virtuals and an earth cache in the top 10 (there are 1892 in total so lots to choose from), the top 4 are 3 virts and the earth cache.

 

not sure what it shows, may be more people do virtuals, may be they have been round a while so they have more chance of being remembered, may be that actually it doesnt really matter one jot as long as people enjoy it

 

and may be i need to get to ripon at 9pm to enjoy the top rated one

 

As I have started to go through our cache finds to add the favourites, I have also found that most through the first trawl are virtuals and earthcaches We have enjoyed being shown and learning about something of interest including visiting a number of islands off the Welsh coast

I can also recommend the 9pm at Ripon as we were able to enjoy the experience during the first Mega at Harrogate!!!!

Edited January 1, 2011 by mollyjak

[+Amberel]

not sure what it shows, may be more people do virtuals, may be they have been round a while so they have more chance of being remembered, may be that actually it doesnt really matter one jot as long as people enjoy it

So far I haven't given a favorite to any virtual, but it's possible that may change tomorrow when we visit Imber village on our way to Bath.

 

I'm mostly not a fan of virtuals (including EarthCaches, which are just a specialised virtual), even though I use OpenCaching extensively (.org.uk, not Garmin) where virtuals are still permitted. It slightly irks me to call them caches when plainly they are no such thing. I think Groundspeak have got it mostly right by providing a similar alternative facility (waymarks).

 

Rgds, Andy

[+*mouse*]

I find myself agreeing with the OP - looking through my favourites list there is no doubt that the virtuals (and slightly more so, earthcaches) figure very highly.

It's something I reflected on at the time - as until I started awarding favourite points I didn't realise my preferences were so strong for earthcaches.

Interestingly of my hides the same pattern is true - more of my earthcaches have been favourited than other types.

[+*mouse*]

and may be i need to get to ripon at 9pm to enjoy the top rated one

That one is very good and I would definitely recommend it. Have been to watch a few times over the years and I always enjoy the talk that follows. I just love the fact that this event has gone every night for hundred's of years. It's fab

[+pklong]

Actually looking over my logs, virtual caches have usually scored highly. There have been a handful of stinkers where the pointlessness of bringing me to the location was compounded by the lack of a cache to find, but on the whole they have brought me to interesting locations where placing a physical cache is impossible. I can't wait for their return.

 

Philip

[tony and carina]

not sure what it shows, may be more people do virtuals, may be they have been round a while so they have more chance of being remembered, may be that actually it doesnt really matter one jot as long as people enjoy it

So far I haven't given a favorite to any virtual, but it's possible that may change tomorrow when we visit Imber village on our way to Bath.

 

I'm mostly not a fan of virtuals (including EarthCaches, which are just a specialised virtual), even though I use OpenCaching extensively (.org.uk, not Garmin) where virtuals are still permitted. It slightly irks me to call them caches when plainly they are no such thing. I think Groundspeak have got it mostly right by providing a similar alternative facility (waymarks).

 

Rgds, Andy

 

Andy we may see you there, hoping to arrive about 11 ish all being well

 

tony and carina

Edited January 1, 2011 by tony and carina

[+Delta68]

There have been a handful of stinkers where the pointlessness of bringing me to the location was compounded by the lack of a cache to find, but on the whole they have brought me to interesting locations where placing a physical cache is impossible.

 

I have to agree. Stonehenge Virtual is pointless - we all already knew there were some stones there!

The nearby Woodhenge and Sun Gap virts are much more interesting as there were places we would not have gone to if it hadn't been for caching.

 

:-)

 

Mark

[+Amberel]

... Andy we may see you there, hoping to arrive about 11 ish all being well

 

tony and carina

We may indeed spot each other - I'd take a guess we'll be there 10:30 to 11:00 ish. I think there's too many of us for my car so we'll be in sandvika's Land Rover (I think it's a Disco). Won't be able to hang around for too long though, we've got a busy schedule, most of it underground.

 

Rgds, Andy

[el10t]

16th Century Pub! Best virtual ever.

[dodgydaved]

16th Century Pub! Best virtual ever.

 

I'll drink to that!

[+ratcliffe]

My favourite is a virtual because its such an obscure place - it is a churchyard in the middle of a field, which in turn is surrounded by an opencase quarry of some time, but there isn't a church in sight.

Very strange place, and somewhere that I really didn't know existed so close to me. A cracking cache.

[+jonnyt]

looks like a good excuse for a friday night in ripon (suspect it may involve staying over, a few beers and a walk the next day as well) and i do need to visit the 16th century pub, it was on the list, when i'm down there soon :-)

[+Happy Humphrey]

I think that if your favourite is a virtual, then perhaps geocaching isn't really your thing. If the container is irrelevant then just go Waymarking. Or just go for a nice walk!

 

I'm not saying that it's a problem, but geocaching is really about finding physical items that people have placed; a secondary benefit is that you get to see locations that you otherwise wouldn't have bothered with - but other pastimes also do that to some extent (often better). If you're more interested in the locations then Waymarks are far better. I wish we could remove virtuals and earthcaches from geocaching altogether.

[+redsox_mark]

I think that if your favourite is a virtual, then perhaps geocaching isn't really your thing. If the container is irrelevant then just go Waymarking. Or just go for a nice walk!

 

I'm not saying that it's a problem, but geocaching is really about finding physical items that people have placed; a secondary benefit is that you get to see locations that you otherwise wouldn't have bothered with - but other pastimes also do that to some extent (often better). If you're more interested in the locations then Waymarks are far better. I wish we could remove virtuals and earthcaches from geocaching altogether.

 

I see what you are saying, but I don't quite agree.

 

If someone generally prefers - all things being equal - virtuals to physical caches, then I agree with you. But generally that's not what I think is happening here.

 

I think that what is happening is that a high percentage of Virtual/Earth caches are in "interesting places". Earth Caches need to have some interesting earth feature; and many virtuals were created when there needed to be a "wow factor". Obviously many physical caches are in interesting places too; but a lot are in car parks etc.

 

As it turns out, my most favourite caches are NOT virtuals; though I do have some on my favourites list. But if I look at my absolute top favourite so far GC2GAMT (which is a physical cache) - if the cache owner had made it an earth cache instead, it still would have been my favourite. The journey to get there (including the puzzle to solve) was so amazing that really didn't matter what the box was like, or if there was one at all.

 

I like the whole Geocaching experience - including finding boxes. And all being equal, I do prefer if there is a box to find. I think Geocaching is one of my "things". But I will take a virtual in an amazing place over a clever hide in a supermarket car park any day.

[+abanazar]

An interesting last couple of posts, but I think I lean towards Happy Humphrey's side of the fence!

 

For me, geocaching has two core dimensions: the "geo" bit, and the "cache" bit. (There there are other dimensions too of course, but these are my fundamentals.) My favourite geocache will need a good "geo" component, so is unlikely to be found in the 'burbs. It will also need a good "cache" component, so it is likely to involve some imaginative containers; it will probably also have involved a bit of brainwork, because that is part of the hunt for me.

 

Now it becomes obvious why my favourite cache is unlikely to be non-physical, as it is lacking in the "cache" dimension.

 

Since my definition of geocaching involves good "geo", I am still likely to really enjoy where a non-physical listing takes me; indeed, I may enjoy it so much that I stick it in my top 10% "geocache" list, as this is a convenient place for me to store good experiences whilst out and about. However, it is unlikely to take the top spot because it's not a physical cache.

 

If I were really serious about "geo" without "cache", I would look more at Waymarking or other activities. As it happens, I prefer the combination of "geo" and "cache", so I go geocaching after physical listings, and I find the odd non-physical while I'm at it.

[+currykev]

My least favourite is a virtual.

It's been there since I started caching. And it's close enough to grab at lunchtime. But I refuse to pay to go into a church.

[+Happy Humphrey]

If I were really serious about "geo" without "cache", I would look more at Waymarking or other activities. As it happens, I prefer the combination of "geo" and "cache", so I go geocaching after physical listings, and I find the odd non-physical while I'm at it.

Good post, and fair enough in your case. But in the end if you like a "geo" without "cache", then virtual caches deliver a pretty poor experience compared to some other activities.

 

Take Munro (or Corbett) bagging, for instance; hundreds of fantastic summits to log; with great views and experiences aplenty. Or if you're not that active, get a Good Pub Guide and have a pint in all the ones in your county (no, not in a day - please!). Or buy a guidebook to "hidden Britain" and seek out some lesser-known spots. Waymarking may be looked down upon by some, but you can pick a category you're interested in (there's got to be one or two for anyone), fire up the GPSr and head out without having to worry about some artificial logging rules (in the main).

 

Nope, all respect to those that like the occasional Virtual but if they are at the top of your list I suggest, erm, "getting out more".

[+t.a.folk]

Oh dear ,one of our " favouritist" "favorites " is a locationless,

"Steel Wheel".

[+redsox_mark]

An interesting last couple of posts, but I think I lean towards Happy Humphrey's side of the fence!

 

For me, geocaching has two core dimensions: the "geo" bit, and the "cache" bit. (There there are other dimensions too of course, but these are my fundamentals.) My favourite geocache will need a good "geo" component, so is unlikely to be found in the 'burbs. It will also need a good "cache" component, so it is likely to involve some imaginative containers; it will probably also have involved a bit of brainwork, because that is part of the hunt for me.

 

Now it becomes obvious why my favourite cache is unlikely to be non-physical, as it is lacking in the "cache" dimension.

 

Since my definition of geocaching involves good "geo", I am still likely to really enjoy where a non-physical listing takes me; indeed, I may enjoy it so much that I stick it in my top 10% "geocache" list, as this is a convenient place for me to store good experiences whilst out and about. However, it is unlikely to take the top spot because it's not a physical cache.

 

If I were really serious about "geo" without "cache", I would look more at Waymarking or other activities. As it happens, I prefer the combination of "geo" and "cache", so I go geocaching after physical listings, and I find the odd non-physical while I'm at it.

 

I agree; in fact I think we all are agreeing to a great extent. My point was simply that if there is a virtual where the "geo" part is so good, it could become a favourite (for me), but probably not reach the top of the list (unless the geo bit was so amazing...).

 

Actually looking at my numbers, less than 2% of the caches I've found are non-physical; so obviously I don't put a priority on finding them. But I did put 4 of the 19 non-physical caches I've found on my favourites list.

[+Haggis Hunter]

I personally think that the stats speak for themselves. Out of the 'current' UK top 10 favourites. 5 are virtuals, 2 are earthcaches (which we all know are an other form of virtual), 1 does have a log but states it does not have a container, which leaves only 2 cache out of the top 10 having physical containers.

 

To add to it out of the 'current' top 100 favourite UK caches, 24 of them are virtuals. Out of the 200 active UK virtuals, 179 have got a favourite ribbon against them.

 

So whether you are a fan of virtuals, Waymarking or neither of them, to me the facts say that virtuals are liked by a large proportion of the community. They are only a very small percentage of our overall caches, yet they are up there and above in some cases with the physical caches.

[+Happy Humphrey]

I personally think that the stats speak for themselves. Out of the 'current' UK top 10 favourites. 5 are virtuals, 2 are earthcaches (which we all know are an other form of virtual), 1 does have a log but states it does not have a container, which leaves only 2 cache out of the top 10 having physical containers.

 

To add to it out of the 'current' top 100 favourite UK caches, 24 of them are virtuals. Out of the 200 active UK virtuals, 179 have got a favourite ribbon against them.

 

So whether you are a fan of virtuals, Waymarking or neither of them, to me the facts say that virtuals are liked by a large proportion of the community. They are only a very small percentage of our overall caches, yet they are up there and above in some cases with the physical caches.

I'm not sure where the current top 100 list is to be found, but I've noticed that the "favourites" system does have an obvious weakness. One of mine has been "favorited" 5 times. Chances are it'll never get above 10-20 even if I'm really lucky. At the moment there have only been 8 finds, so 5/8 is quite a good hit rate. Trouble is, it's a difficult puzzle cache; so the number of logs is bound to be limited. Only the most determined will take the trouble to attempt it, and once all the determined cachers in the area have found it then logs will be rare. So it will never get into the top 100 even if everyone "Favorites" it.

 

Now, a nice handy well-maintained virtual with plenty of room for swaps, an interesting hide and a creative and amusing approach...sorry I'll start again. An interesting location that's easy to get to, will attract hundreds of logs if presented as a "virtual". With little effort from the cache setter, it's likely to do well in the "Favourites" league table even if only a small proportion bother to "Favorite" it.

 

It would be interesting to compare the number that "Favorite" a Virtual with the number that "Favorite" the same spot when presented as a Waymark.

[+redsox_mark]

Yes, that is a flaw in the favourites system; to get a large number of "votes" a cache needs a large number of finds. Regardless of if they are virtuals or not.

 

One of my top favourites is This one. 100% of those who found it (including me) have marked it as a favourite. But only 2 people have found it so far...

[+MartyBartfast]

Yes, that is a flaw in the favourites system; to get a large number of "votes" a cache needs a large number of finds.

 

On the Feedback forum the frog has said that in one of the forthcoming updates they will also represent the favourites as a percentage of finds as well as an absolute number.

[+Haggis Hunter]

I'm not sure where the current top 100 list is to be found, but I've noticed that the "favourites" system does have an obvious weakness. One of mine has been "favorited" 5 times. Chances are it'll never get above 10-20 even if I'm really lucky. At the moment there have only been 8 finds, so 5/8 is quite a good hit rate. Trouble is, it's a difficult puzzle cache; so the number of logs is bound to be limited. Only the most determined will take the trouble to attempt it, and once all the determined cachers in the area have found it then logs will be rare. So it will never get into the top 100 even if everyone "Favorites" it.

 

Now, a nice handy well-maintained virtual with plenty of room for swaps, an interesting hide and a creative and amusing approach...sorry I'll start again. An interesting location that's easy to get to, will attract hundreds of logs if presented as a "virtual". With little effort from the cache setter, it's likely to do well in the "Favourites" league table even if only a small proportion bother to "Favorite" it.

 

It would be interesting to compare the number that "Favorite" a Virtual with the number that "Favorite" the same spot when presented as a Waymark.

For the top 100 favourite caches do a search of all UK caches, click the favourite tab and then the first 5 pages are your top 100. I to agree that it is a flaw, but it's a small one. Ben Nevis is not the easiest of caches to hike to, yet it's in the top 10 of the UK caches. Once the percentage rating is implemented and as long as you can search with that as well, it may well show completely different results. But with what we have at the moment virtuals stand out as being popular and liked caches.

 

Waymarking has been mentioned a few times in this thread. As you may have guessed I am not against virtuals and have liked most that I have found. I tried out Waymarking when it first started, I even posted some waymarks. But I just couldn't get into it, just wasn't really my cup of tea. It suits some but not others, just as virtuals do.

[+Pharisee]

There's some quite unexpected results here. Looking at my own caches... I have 38 currently available that I've set and two that I've adopted... All bar two have been favoured at least once, most more than that.

Three of the top four most favoured are Puzzle / Mystery caches, the second highest being a fairly tricky multi-cache. The next five are also multi-caches. The highest traditional is down in 9th place. That's not at all what I expected. Maybe I should go out and set a few more puzzles and not bother with traditionals any more

[+Haggis Hunter]

Yes, that is a flaw in the favourites system; to get a large number of "votes" a cache needs a large number of finds.

 

On the Feedback forum the frog has said that in one of the forthcoming updates they will also represent the favourites as a percentage of finds as well as an absolute number.

This has now been implemented, and is calculated against the premium members and not all logs. This is due to the fact that only premium members can vote a cache as a favourite.

[+Original A1]

Interesting comments. I see why Happy Humphrey has the views he does but isn't the point of geocaching to discover new things and visit new places, whether or not a container is there? Like Simply Paul, Fly-By is one of my favourites and yes, although I was new to the game and cheekily logged it from my armchair as I instantly knew what it would be (and rightly got a mild rebuke for doing so!), I made sure to visit the area a couple of weeks later when down, and so it was properly "found" too.

 

For me, as a relative late-comer, most of the really good spots had already been taken in Edinburgh, and virtuals were no longer allowed to be set anyway. That means someone else gets more favourites on their list than I do, but that's not a problem because it just goes to show those spots deserve the footfall/favouriting they get. If you look at Haggis Hunter's list for instance, he has a very high favourite count on it for that reason.

 

I have an adopted cache in a very popular and easy-to-access part of Edinburgh and it's a bit galling that it has zillions more favourites than mine, but again it's because of its location and just goes to reinforce that it was worth keeping going when its real owners moved away. Likewise, it's been going for a lot longer than mine, so is likely to pick up more votes as it's had squillions of visitors.

 

I see now that they've put in a new marker where you can see what percentage of loggers have favourited a cache. It doesn't really matter to me - I pay a little more attention to one that has received votes, but will not overlook those who haven't.

 

It's all part of the fun, innit?

 

[+jenandberry]

I have some virtuals as favorites, and some Earthcaches. Yes, finding a virtual or earth cache is a slightly different caching experiance from finding a box with swaps but one of the things I like about geocaching is finding new / different / hidden places that I wouldn't otherwise have visited. I am 100% positive that these caches would not be improved by having a micro hidden somewhere nearby which is probably all you could manage to hide (if that) at some of the locations. I hope this makes sense.

[+lodgebarn]

My least favourite is a virtual.

It's been there since I started caching. And it's close enough to grab at lunchtime. But I refuse to pay to go into a church.

 

Forget the church and wear blinkers, go for the walk up, if rainy go to be seriously wet - I did, and most importantly the view. Well worth it .