Confessions of a "Numbers Cacher"

[+Ecylram]

I admit it, I'm a "Numbers Cacher". When I was young I found that I had a special relationship with numbers. I could remember them easily and I found I could do numbers calculations in my head that left others around me amazed. When I went to college I looked forward to taking statistics classes and writing code to manipulate numbers into meaningful results.

 

Once I entered the "real world", I migrated into the burgeoning computer business where I was more likely to remember your IP address than I was your name. Over time, my ability to remember names improved but my natural affinity to numbers never went away.

 

In the 90's I was fascinated by GPS technology and how you could pinpoint your numeric location on the Earth with a handheld device. I was happy when the government opened up the technology in 2000 and allowed for more accurate numbers. The newspaper didn't carry much news on this but a .rec group on usenet updated me on what was to become the emerging game of geocaching.

 

Despite all that, I didn't get into geocaching until last year. I was looking for something to keep me busy while my wife was in her many doctors appointments. Geocaching gave me something to do and my wife no longer felt guilty about all the waiting I was doing for her. It was a win/win situation and when she could, my wife loved going geocaching with me.

 

Then I stumbled upon GSAK which, with the help of macros, spit out all these wonderful statistics about our caching and my numbers fascination resurfaced.

 

Here's what I found:

 

*I'm enjoying persuing our caching streak of almost 200 days. I like watching all numbers fill up on the calendar. The goal forced me to go out and grab a cache on days when other things were on my mind. I found new parks, new neighborhoods, and new CO's that I would have missed but making that extra trip. I've gain new experiences that I value.

 

*I'm enjoying slowly filling out the Fizzy challenge (44 squares, so far) and, as a result, I'm making special trips to visit caches that used to be outside my normal caching area. I'm working on Multi's and mystery caches that I might have otherwise glossed over. I like watching those numbers go up and enjoy the new experiences I'm acquiring.

 

*I found caches by 26 cachers with names starting by each letter in the alphabet and enjoyed the process. I also found 26 caches starting with each letter of the alphabet with similar enjoyment.

 

*I enjoyed grabbing caches in 9 counties in one day. It took me to a part of a county that was beautiful and that I had never visited before.

 

*Next summer I'm grabbing a bunch of high-altitude caches so I can meet a challenge requirement of 100,000 feet in altitude in 7 combined caches. I'll be visiting locations I'd never seen before and I'm looking forward to it.

 

*I met the requirements of another challenge cache that required visits to 32 areas. That brought me to new locations and exposed me to CO's in areas I had no other reason to visit.

 

*I'm proud of the fact that the first cache we ever put out garned 3 favorite votes from the first few finders. Now I'm hoping to create a cache that generates a higher number of favorites.

 

These days, our cache totals are going up at a pretty good clip. Caching every day will do that, but I'm spending a large portion of my time grabbing harder difficulty caches instead of grabbing 10 LPC's. But it's all for the numbers.

 

And here's a little secret...

 

I'm not the only one. A large percentage of the population is "left brain" dominate and they enjoy left brain activities. Geocaching is one of those unique activities that can appeal to both the left-brainded or the right-brained. The right-brained feed off the nature, the beauty, and the creativity. The left-brained enjoy the challenges, the numbers, and the strategy. But, truth be told, nobody is all right or left-brained. There are aspects of each that appeal to almost all of us.

 

This is why I'm bothered by those who write off certain types of geocachers as "numbers hounds" and other similar terms. The terms are usually meant to be demeaning and they group a large swath of cachers with varying interests & styles into one over-simplified group.

 

There are a lot of types of cachers and caches out there. This game is big enough to include all of us and we are fortunate enough to be able to choose how we wish to play this game. You may not understand why other cachers enjoy what they do, but if they weren't enjoying it they would be doing something else.

 

I'm a "numbers cacher" and I'm proud of it!

[+JL_HSTRE]

I think there's a difference between enjoying challenge caches and solving puzzles vs those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

[+JB10-4]

+1

So some can actually enjoy the game and the numbers. Everyone loves to throw out "It's not about the Numbers" maybe for them but some like them. I really enjoy watching my stuff on GSAK and we frequently set goals based on our numbers.

 

One I am trying to work on is keeping our Traditional to 90% or under. Think it is really going to be a challenge.

 

Thanks for coming out and showing that Numbers are another way to enjoy this Game.

J

[+Panther&Pine]

I agree, the mashup of statistics is a huge driving force for me. I like seeing the new stats page and I have a not so secret love affair with GASK.

 

What I don't like about the 'numbers game' is that my stats don't really affect anyone else's enjoyment.

Edited January 6, 2011 by MooseJawSpruce

[+bflentje]

I am 100% a numbers watcher and love statistics. I love watching the numbers of those around me as well. NO, not for any competitive reason. I truly enjoy seeing each unique cacher and their makeup.

 

Do I want higher numbers? Personally, yep. And though I do watch my neighboring cachers, I honestly don't give a rip as to where I rank with them. I will be honest though, there are two important stats that I am particularly proud of.. States Cached, of which I am NOT in the lead in my home state but some day hope to be. And Webcam Caches found, of which I believe but can't prove, that I've found more than anyone in my home state.

[+rawkhopper]

I love the stats of the game. As soon as I realized it was possible to keep track of them I started tweaking and tweaking to show what I wanted to see. I think it keeps the game more interesting. I don't cache often so you wouldn't know I like the numbers portion by looking at my stats but I did go for a single cache out of a ton surrounding me just because I want to fill that spot on my matrix .

 

What was really interesting about the numbers of that cache is that it was a cache dedicated to another cachers milestone of a 1000 or something like that. And further more I happened to show up at the same time another cacher and it happened to be the owner. The owner was moving the cache to a different side of the stream so that people did not have to cross the stream in winter. I did not see him near the GZ so I assumed he was bird watching or something. When he left I found the spot that should have been the cache site. Then when I got back to log a DNF I noticed that the page had changed and he was there to move the cache! What are the odds of that happening!

 

I went back the next day and grabbed the cache

[4wheelin_fool]

And here's a little secret...

 

I'm not the only one. A large percentage of the population is "left brain" dominate and they enjoy left brain activities. Geocaching is one of those unique activities that can appeal to both the left-brainded or the right-brained. The right-brained feed off the nature, the beauty, and the creativity. The left-brained enjoy the challenges, the numbers, and the strategy. But, truth be told, nobody is all right or left-brained. There are aspects of each that appeal to almost all of us.

 

This is why I'm bothered by those who write off certain types of geocachers as "numbers hounds" and other similar terms. The terms are usually meant to be demeaning and they group a large swath of cachers with varying interests & styles into one over-simplified group.

 

There are a lot of types of cachers and caches out there. This game is big enough to include all of us and we are fortunate enough to be able to choose how we wish to play this game. You may not understand why other cachers enjoy what they do, but if they weren't enjoying it they would be doing something else.

 

I'm a "numbers cacher" and I'm proud of it!

 

Nice post. You are absolutely correct, describing right and left brain cachers. However, relying on labels, such as "numbers cachers", or "puritans" is completely a left brain trait which is similar to using numbers. All numbers are vague, as everything that can be counted has it's own individual differences, similar to words or labels. A 10,000 word essay describing a 1 minute period of time, is still is not as accurate as the reality of being there. Labels are fine for communication, but when there is too much emphasis on the pigeonholing and categorizations, is when there is problems.

 

This is why I'm bothered by those who write off certain types of geocachers as "numbers hounds" and other similar terms. The terms are usually meant to be demeaning and they group a large swath of cachers with varying interests & styles into one over-simplified group.

 

The facination with numbers groups a large swath of cachers with varying interests & styles into one over-simplified group also. No terms or words are demeaning until they are used in that way. If a word is used constantly in a negative manner, then it becomes thought of as negative, even though it may not be intended that way. There is nothing wrong with using labels such "numbers hounds" or "puritans", it's how they are used which is important.

[Mr.Yuck]

I think there's a difference between enjoying challenge caches and solving puzzles vs those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

 

I think there's a difference between liking Geocaching statistics (as I do, and where this thread appears to be going) vs. those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

 

Having statistics in your profile or a copy of GSAK on your desktop does not a "numbers hound" make. Not even close, in my opinion.

[+Jennifer&Dean]

I agree completely! It is the stats and neat numbers that call to me. While Dean likes the caching and finding all he can, I am always trying to fill in something, or get the oldest or one that fills in a missing blank.

 

We've been trying to fill in our calendar. It took alot of work for us to find the last 3 caches in December we needed to find since it was snowing, blowing wind and sub 0 temperatures each day we went out. There were only 3 possible caches we could even try to find since all the others are probably buried in the snow. But we preservered and had a blast making sure we filled in our empty days!

 

The stats always make my day. The numbers runs... I can do them and have a blast but am more likely to fully enjoy a day that includes a hike up a mountain or around a single park getting caches along the trails.

Jen

[+niraD]

This is why I'm bothered by those who write off certain types of geocachers as "numbers hounds" and other similar terms. The terms are usually meant to be demeaning and they group a large swath of cachers with varying interests & styles into one over-simplified group.

FWIW, what people usually mean when they use the term "numbers hound" isn't someone who is interested in statistics the way you are (cache-a-day challenges, fizzy challenges, etc.). The term "numbers hound" usually refers to those who do numbers runs, or who otherwise find large numbers of caches. Maybe you're a "statistics hound", or if you prefer, a "statistics cacher".

 

And not everyone uses "numbers hound" to be demeaning. I certainly don't. I use "numbers hound" and "FTF hound" and similar terms to describe geocachers who are especially interested in numbers of finds, in FTFs, etc. If you can suggest a better term, then go for it. Maybe it will catch on. But expecting others not to use a label of some kind is unreasonable. People just don't work that way. The phrase "geocachers who are especially interested in numbers of finds" is a mouthful, so people naturally develop a shorter label to describe that group.

[+JB10-4]

I think there's a difference between enjoying challenge caches and solving puzzles vs those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

 

I think there's a difference between liking Geocaching statistics (as I do, and where this thread appears to be going) vs. those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

 

Having statistics in your profile or a copy of GSAK on your desktop does not a "numbers hound" make. Not even close, in my opinion.

 

+1

The total nuber is good but stricly looking on that is not what i feel most "Number" people would be into. We are looking at all the stats and working specifc numbers or goals.

 

But if you are soley into the total number of finds and thats the only thing that matters to you. "Cache on its your game."

Edited January 6, 2011 by JB10-4

[+Ecylram]

I think there's a difference between liking Geocaching statistics (as I do, and where this thread appears to be going) vs. those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

 

Having statistics in your profile or a copy of GSAK on your desktop does not a "numbers hound" make. Not even close, in my opinion.

What if someone wants to see if they can get 100 caches in one day? Would that be wrong? (Or 20, or 200)?

 

Why is ok for someone to try to grab 81 Fizzy caches, or 8 types of caches in a day, but not ok for someone else to try to get X number of caches in a day? (Assuming everybody is following generally accepted proper cacher decorum.)

 

There are nine cachers in my state with over 10,000 finds, one with 29,000 finds. If anybody's qualified, they would certainly be "numbers hounds", right? The ones that I've met have been delightful and several have made significant contributions to the game. I've got nothing negative say about any of them, but I should dislike them because they find too many caches in a 'career', year, or day?

 

It's all numbers, they like one thing and I like another. What they do doesn't hurt me and what I do doesn't hurt them. You enjoy your caching and they enjoy theirs and I don't want to take away any of it from anybody.

[+Ecylram]

And not everyone uses "numbers hound" to be demeaning. I certainly don't. I use "numbers hound" and "FTF hound" and similar terms to describe geocachers who are especially interested in numbers of finds, in FTFs, etc. If you can suggest a better term, then go for it. Maybe it will catch on. But expecting others not to use a label of some kind is unreasonable. People just don't work that way. The phrase "geocachers who are especially interested in numbers of finds" is a mouthful, so people naturally develop a shorter label to describe that group.

I can't disagree, and I've used "FTF hounds" here and elsewhere. As you say, I don't considerate it derogatory in and of itself.

 

However, and there is always a "however", the term is used as a blanket derogatory statement by some for those who choose to do Power Trails. A lot of people who do the E.T. highway, for example, aren't doing it to PAD numbers. They are going for an geocaching experience and I don't agree with casting dispersion on the entire group of cachers who choose to do a power trail.

 

Even worse, I'm the kind of heathen that believes its OK if someone wants to get 1200 caches in a day for sole purpose of having a bigger number on their stat page. As long as they are good geocaching citizens about it, then I have no problem.

[+addisonbr]

Even worse, I'm the kind of heathen that believes its OK if someone wants to get 1200 caches in a day for sole purpose of having a bigger number on their stat page. As long as they are good geocaching citizens about it, then I have no problem.

Staying completely agnostic for the moment on whether it's OK or not OK or admirable or loathsome or etc... It's useful to have a term *describing* that philosophy of caching.

 

I've been known to chase FTFs, and use 'FTF hound' to describe myself and others I meet up with at GZ. If someone told me they found the term highly offensive, in the efforts of peace I'd explore something different. If folks who get 1200 caches in a day for the sole purpose of having a bigger number on their stat page don't like 'numbers hound', I can live with that. I might agree with the practice or I might disagree with it, but I never have the goal of being pejorative with the term itself. My goal isn't to insult; my goal is effective communication.

 

I'd just like to be able to use *something* so that I have a shorthand for 'folks who get 1200 caches in a day for the sole purpose of having a bigger number on their stat page'. 'Numbers chaser'? 'High find racker-upper'? 'Quantity cachers'? Whatever it is I'm quite positive I can live with it. But I'd prefer not to have to type a paragraph describing the philosophy when I join a discussion on the topic.

[+Castle Mischief]

I think there's a difference between liking Geocaching statistics (as I do, and where this thread appears to be going) vs. those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

 

Having statistics in your profile or a copy of GSAK on your desktop does not a "numbers hound" make. Not even close, in my opinion.

What if someone wants to see if they can get 100 caches in one day? Would that be wrong? (Or 20, or 200)?

 

Where in his post did he say anything about anything being wrong?

 

I like looking at my numbers on my stats. I don't think that makes me any particular type of cacher.

[+Castle Mischief]

And not everyone uses "numbers hound" to be demeaning. I certainly don't. I use "numbers hound" and "FTF hound" and similar terms to describe geocachers who are especially interested in numbers of finds, in FTFs, etc. If you can suggest a better term, then go for it. Maybe it will catch on. But expecting others not to use a label of some kind is unreasonable. People just don't work that way. The phrase "geocachers who are especially interested in numbers of finds" is a mouthful, so people naturally develop a shorter label to describe that group.

I can't disagree, and I've used "FTF hounds" here and elsewhere. As you say, I don't considerate it derogatory in and of itself.

 

However, and there is always a "however", the term is used as a blanket derogatory statement by some for those who choose to do Power Trails. A lot of people who do the E.T. highway, for example, aren't doing it to PAD numbers. They are going for an geocaching experience and I don't agree with casting dispersion on the entire group of cachers who choose to do a power trail.

 

Even worse, I'm the kind of heathen that believes its OK if someone wants to get 1200 caches in a day for sole purpose of having a bigger number on their stat page. As long as they are good geocaching citizens about it, then I have no problem.

 

If I'm complaning about pratices that concentrate on power trails and I happen to complain about somebody using the term "number hound" or "numbers cacher" and you are not commiting the acts that I've complained about, then I'm not complaining about you.

 

Context is important.

 

Now, is this a thread about "numbers cachers" or is this another thread about power trails?

Edited January 6, 2011 by Castle Mischief

[+EyeD10T]

Very well said, Ecylram, I like your post. Each and every one of us get out of geocaching what we want to, and although sometimes some of these "__________ hounds" might frustrate some of us - to each his own.

[+narcissa]

I like looking at my own numbers, and I like competing with friends from time to time. I don't like it when others compete with me without my knowledge or consent.

[+geodarts]

Stats are part of many games. Baseball. Darts. I like to know how Lincecum does on a cloudy day against left handed batters. I also like to know Phil Taylor's average and whether he is hitting his doubles on a consistent basis. This game also offers endless possibilities of stats. Personally, I like to keep track of the number of drive up caches found while listening to the Grateful Dead, how many holes in my pants were incurred after slipping down a hill or running into barbed wire in search of a cache, how many ticks I pulled off on a given hike, or the number of dnfs I have on caches that sdarken described as "easy" or that j5drew hid a little better than he found it.

Edited January 6, 2011 by mulvaney

[+Castle Mischief]

I don't like it when others compete with me without my knowledge or consent.

 

How does that work exactly?

[+JB10-4]

I like looking at my own numbers, and I like competing with friends from time to time. I don't like it when others compete with me without my knowledge or consent.

Not to be rude but can you explain how some could compete with you without your knowledge or consent.

[+humboldt flier]

I don't like it when others compete with me without my knowledge or consent.

 

How does that work exactly?

 

?? Ditto ?? ... Just curious about why it might matter

[+narcissa]

I like looking at my own numbers, and I like competing with friends from time to time. I don't like it when others compete with me without my knowledge or consent.

Not to be rude but can you explain how some could compete with you without your knowledge or consent.

 

Anytime someone assumes that the arbitrary value they assign to cache finds is an objective means of comparison between us, they're competing with me without my consent. And people have certainly involved me and my caches in FTF races without my knowledge.

[+narcissa]

I don't like it when others compete with me without my knowledge or consent.

 

How does that work exactly?

 

?? Ditto ?? ... Just curious about why it might matter

 

It matters when someone flames me for not following some arbitrary set of FTF rules that I didn't agree to.

[+geodarts]

I like looking at my own numbers, and I like competing with friends from time to time. I don't like it when others compete with me without my knowledge or consent.

Not to be rude but can you explain how some could compete with you without your knowledge or consent.

 

You can always pick out somebody from the world caching stats and compete with them without their knowledge. I am an easy target so people should be free to do that with me, just don't rub it in if we ever meet at a mega event.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

 

These days, our cache totals are going up at a pretty good clip. Caching every day will do that, but I'm spending a large portion of my time grabbing harder difficulty caches instead of grabbing 10 LPC's. But it's all for the numbers.

 

If that's what floats your boat then you're lucky that you happen to live in a fair rich geocache environment.

 

There are many place in the world that, for someone that works for a living and has family obligations, caching every day become effectively impossible. In a less cache dense environment, where it's quite easy to find nearby caches at a rate much faster than new caches are being placed, it doesn't take very long to clear out an area large enough such that the amount of time it takes to travel to the nearest geocache is greater than amount of time one as available to go geocaching. It took me only about a year before I effectively could not go geocaching during the week because I placed a higher priority on going to work and spending time with my family.

[+Castle Mischief]

I don't like it when others compete with me without my knowledge or consent.

 

How does that work exactly?

 

?? Ditto ?? ... Just curious about why it might matter

 

It matters when someone flames me for not following some arbitrary set of FTF rules that I didn't agree to.

 

I don't want to argue the point, but that doesn't sound like they are competing with you. That sounds like they're being a jerk, as jerks will be. If you don't know about it, then it can't affect you and if they flamed you, then I'd assume you knew about it. I guess I still don't follow.

[+lil_cav_wings]

I think, in your case, "statistics hound" would be a better description.

 

You mentioned something in your OP about visiting places that you've never been before and trying harder and harder caches. I think that crosses the barrier from being someone who is generally thought of as being a "numbers hound," someone who needs validation by comparing themself to everyone else and finding superiority in that. You're in a competition with yourself... or, like in narcissa's case, in friendly competition with good folks.

 

When you're striving to achieve something beyond what you would normally do, you're not judging yourself by what others do. You're in competition with your own potential. If that makes any sense...

[+M 5]

I don't think the original post is representing "numbers cachers" very well. I like statistics and don't care much for total number of caches found. The detractors of high find total cachers are differnt too. Some don't like all the easy numbers. I really don't care that much about that. A little possibly, if they are braggarts. The other argument is that the number runner mentality is degrading and possibly harmful to geocacing. I'm more in that camp. So I like statistic generated numbers and actively chase the ones that interest me, and dislike many aspects of the powertrail and urban micro explosion. So on one side I'm a numbers cacher and on the other side I am not. There is a distinction that the original post blends into one entity.

[+KDotBlueDot]

A numbers hound and someone who worries about statistics are two different things to me as well. A numbers hound does things just to get the numbers, losing sight of the intentions behind the game. "Throwdowns" are symptomatic of a numbers hound. The only difference between the two experiences of finding or not finding a cache is the signature in the log and the aha moment when you spot the cache (LOVE that feeling). Faking the aha moment is just plain strange...it'd be like faking 'that other thing' while alone! Who would you impress?? The only reason to throw down is obviously for the numbers.

 

Someone who counts First to Finds values that statistic...doesn't make them a numbers hound. If they speed, leave a family function or swear and moan when they missed out on the FTF, they are a numbers hound. Going out in the middle of the night to get an ftf is passion...not sleeping the rest of the night if you don't get FTF is a hound.

 

I've said it before, EVERYONE counts something... but it's what you will or won't do to get that number that determines a numbers hound. It's the behaviour of the person not ANY of the numbers associated with that person that determines if they are a hound.

Edited January 6, 2011 by KDotBlueDot

[+fizzymagic]

I think there's a difference between enjoying challenge caches and solving puzzles vs those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

 

I think there's a difference between liking Geocaching statistics (as I do, and where this thread appears to be going) vs. those that care most about the total number of finds by their name.

 

Having statistics in your profile or a copy of GSAK on your desktop does not a "numbers hound" make. Not even close, in my opinion.

 

Right. I love the statistics; heck, I made several of them up. I avidly pursue my total geocaching mileage statistic, and I love going through my DB of finds to see whether I meet certain challenges. If the challenge is cool enough, I will sometimes even select caches to find based on it.

 

But I would never consider myself a "numbers hound." I don't have all that many finds, and I am much more concerned about the quality of the experience I have in solving and finding a cache than I am about the total number I have done.

 

So I submit that there is a big difference between those who will do anything to log a cache to increase their numbers and those who enjoy their statistics. The former is what I would characterize as a "numbers hound."

 

I don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with those who love racking up numbers. Alamogul and I are good friends. We have different caching styles, but he is a great guy and I love going caching with him.

 

I've been caching almost 9 years, and I can assure you that there are very few cachers who can maintain an interest in accumulating smileys for that long. People generally either drop out or find new ways to challenge themselves. For example, I used to try to keep some distance from my home coords "clean" of caches, but when I realized that I was doing a bunch of lame caches because of that, I quit. Now I only go for one nearby if there is something special about it.

 

It is perhaps tougher for those of us who began in the earlier days of caching, because the game has changed so much. In 2002, we used to anxiously await every new cache within driving distance. The FTF game wasn't necessary because everybody in the area showed up right away because they were so excited for a new cache being placed.

 

It's not that way any more. A friend helped me enormously by giving me a new perspective. The caches out there are like a river. You will never be able to drink the whole thing, and trying to do so would be unpleasant. Rather, sip from the part of the stream you like the most.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

Right. I love the statistics; heck, I made several of them up. I avidly pursue my total geocaching mileage statistic, and I love going through my DB of finds to see whether I meet certain challenges. If the challenge is cool enough, I will sometimes even select caches to find based on it.

 

But I would never consider myself a "numbers hound." I don't have all that many finds, and I am much more concerned about the quality of the experience I have in solving and finding a cache than I am about the total number I have done.

 

So I submit that there is a big difference between those who will do anything to log a cache to increase their numbers and those who enjoy their statistics. The former is what I would characterize as a "numbers hound."

 

I don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with those who love racking up numbers. Alamogul and I are good friends. We have different caching styles, but he is a great guy and I love going caching with him.

 

 

Oh, I'll go with Fizzy's definition of a "numbers hound", just for the sake of having a definition. Because I do agree with the distinction between Stats Hound and Numbers Hound.

 

I also agree with what the OP said, it's not just "numbers hounds" who want to do desert power trails. A lot of people would like to try them, although mostly highly active geocachers who are premium members, what I believe is a small percentage of the overall geocaching population. And of course you can throw all the numbers hounds in that subset.

 

Because, for example, I myself have done a power trail. But it was my kind of power trail; 43 smalls and regulars with a variety of containers and hiding methods along a 6.5 mile stretch of rural rails to trails. Ultimately, I guess what I'm saying is if there were allegations that everyone who has or will do the Rt. 66 power trail is a numbers hound, I'd have to disagree.

[+hukilaulau]

Random thoughts:

Sure, I like numbers too. I use most of the stats generators available.

 

I don't think most of the people going after "power trails" are really fascinated by stats. Just large, shiny numbers.

 

"Power trails" originally were actually on trails.

 

I hate it when I read a cache page that says, "This cache has been placed so that locals could increase their numbers." I won't go for the cache. Even if it's 3 feet away in a DD parking lot. Even though I would have logged it if I hadn't read the cache page.

 

Increasing numbers is not the only reason for "throwdowns." Sometimes they are done by the anti-competition minded people. (Everyone should always find every cache they look for. Here... I'll make sure everyone finds something in this spot)

 

My own quirky number is 2922 finds by December 2012. That's an average of a cache a day for 8 years, including two leapdays.

[+Rosemark]

Well I'll jump in here! I'm a Numbers Hound, and a FTF Hound! I agree totally with the OP, and I am more basic than that. I don't have a real mind for numbers, and have trouble doing even some simple math in my head, but I play this game for the numbers, I take pride in the number of finds and FTF's I get. I have never found a "Lame" Cache, and in my opinion they don't exist. all caches are good caches, as long as they follow Groundspeak rules. I follow all the rules when hunting caches, except, I have been guilty of entering a city park at night. I have been contacted by the Local Police in the parks at night a few times, and after finding out what I am doing they have no problem with it. As long as you treat them with respect. I find they look at the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law, understanding that the law exist to stop vandels, not people out enjoying their hobby. My numbers are not that great, but I don't have enought time to go as oftin as I want to, but I hope to continue to build my numbers. That is the way I enjoy this game, NUMBERS! If you enjoy another aspect of this game, than more power to you.

[Mr.Yuck]

Well I'll jump in here! I'm a Numbers Hound, and a FTF Hound! I agree totally with the OP, and I am more basic than that. I don't have a real mind for numbers, and have trouble doing even some simple math in my head, but I play this game for the numbers, I take pride in the number of finds and FTF's I get. I have never found a "Lame" Cache, and in my opinion they don't exist. all caches are good caches, as long as they follow Groundspeak rules. I follow all the rules when hunting caches, except, I have been guilty of entering a city park at night. I have been contacted by the Local Police in the parks at night a few times, and after finding out what I am doing they have no problem with it. As long as you treat them with respect. I find they look at the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law, understanding that the law exist to stop vandels, not people out enjoying their hobby. My numbers are not that great, but I don't have enought time to go as oftin as I want to, but I hope to continue to build my numbers. That is the way I enjoy this game, NUMBERS! If you enjoy another aspect of this game, than more power to you.

 

Here's a question for you then. Do you mind being called an FTF hound? Do you find it offensive in any way? I'm almost thinking no one would take offense to FTF hound, but it seems some do to Numbers hound.

[+Ike 13]

I'm definitely a stats hound. I'm a math teacher so numbers and stats have always been close to me. I love my FindStatGen and playing with GSAK to see which challenges I qualify for or can do.

 

The thing I've found with all the stats is if you're into improving them you push yourself to do many different things that you may not normally do. You seek out older caches, or different D/T ratings, different cache areas, etc. There have been days I've found 100 caches (never done a power trail). There's been days where I only found only 7 but each added a new county. One power run I've done we also did 8 cache types (now that was crazy). Eash thing requires a lot of planning and I like that aspect as well. Basically stats hounds seem to seek out the most varying array of caches instead of just sticking to P&Gs or long hikes.

 

If someone called me a FTF hound I would feel they are mistaken but I would not be offended. I do not have notifications come to my phone, so the only FTF's I've got are the ones where I was off work with no other obligations just sitting at my computer.

[Luckless]

I'm a "numbers cacher" and I'm proud of it!

 

You're not the first numbers junkie I've met. Seems this game is very well suited for people who like numbers.

Looked at your profile and you have a very impressive stat listing. (I can't even remember stuff like that.) One thing I didn't see was a listing for milestone caches- first, tenth, 50th, 100th, etc., but then I just glanced through.

[+Semper Questio]

I don't cache for the numbers, but I like watching them change as I cache. I sometimes set a numbers-based goal when I cache just to add an element of "purpose". But that's about as much meaning as my numbers have to me, most others' numbers mean nothing to me, and I could not care less what others think of my numbers.

 

That said, I have absolutely nothing against those that play primarily for the numbers. That's one of the great things about this game - how folks can play it any way they want or suits them best. But a few of those numbers-centric cachers I have run across represent a part of this game that bugs me greatly. That is the people that think themselves better people or cachers because of their numbers and/or judge others by theirs.

[+Rosemark]

Well I'll jump in here! I'm a Numbers Hound, and a FTF Hound! I agree totally with the OP, and I am more basic than that. I don't have a real mind for numbers, and have trouble doing even some simple math in my head, but I play this game for the numbers, I take pride in the number of finds and FTF's I get. I have never found a "Lame" Cache, and in my opinion they don't exist. all caches are good caches, as long as they follow Groundspeak rules. I follow all the rules when hunting caches, except, I have been guilty of entering a city park at night. I have been contacted by the Local Police in the parks at night a few times, and after finding out what I am doing they have no problem with it. As long as you treat them with respect. I find they look at the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law, understanding that the law exist to stop vandels, not people out enjoying their hobby. My numbers are not that great, but I don't have enought time to go as oftin as I want to, but I hope to continue to build my numbers. That is the way I enjoy this game, NUMBERS! If you enjoy another aspect of this game, than more power to you.

 

Here's a question for you then. Do you mind being called an FTF hound? Do you find it offensive in any way? I'm almost thinking no one would take offense to FTF hound, but it seems some do to Numbers hound.

 

Nope, doesn't bother me at all, I am a Numbers Hound, and an FTF Hound. Thats one of the aspects of this game that I Love, why would I take offence to it?