Jump to content

What's your favorites-to-hides ratio?


medoug
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

In the spirit of improving the quality of caches, not just the shear hide numbers, I'd like to hear from other hiders how you stack up as a cache hider using the new favorites system. (If you think your cache hides are on average better than most, this is a chance to brag a little too.)

 

Please give your geocaching name, number of favorites votes awarded to number of hides, calculated favorites to hides ratio, date of record, and general hiding area. Below is an example showing the numbers for myself, my brother, and those of an infamously prolific lame-cache hider in the area:

 

Entry format:

caching name

favs:hides

calculated ratio

date entered

hiding area

 

Here's my entry:

medoug

27:22

1.23 :)

1/16/11

NE IA, NW IL, SW WI

 

Here's my brother's entry:

Timber Hawk

15:7

2.14 :)

1/16/11

NE IA, SW WI

 

Here's the prolific lame-cache hider's entry:

not disclosed

22:608

0.04 :(

1/16/11

not disclosed

 

I have include the date of record because as more cachers record their favorites, the ratio is bound to go up. Feel free to update your numbers and dates in your post as time goes by.

 

Even if you don't post your number here, it might be a good time to consider how you stack up as a quality cache hider. (I'd suggest setting a personal improvement goal, but as mentioned, these numbers will naturally go up as cachers add their favorites votes.)

 

There's several things you can do to improve your favorites to hides ratio. You can put out more "cool" caches; you can improve the quality or uniqueness of the cache hides you already have in place; or, if necessary, consider archiving caches that you believe aren't of interest in your caching community. I would recommend the two former options over the latter one.

 

medoug.

Edited by medoug
Link to comment

... and this is the downside of a rating system.

 

Hey, I don't think anyone can deny that the rating system was created to identify great caches, so what's the harm in identifying great cache hiders too? My brother and I have put a lot of work and maintenance into the caches we hide. Besides the find logs, the favorites system is just another way to measure how well our caches fulfill what the caching public would like to find. It's really no different than getting a report card. Some people get A's and some get F's. That's the way life is. The same applies to caches and cache owners.

 

medoug.

Link to comment

Too much work to calculate.

 

Besides a large number of my hides only get 3 to 5 visits per year.

 

One of my hides has 19 favs, 2 of them have 8. I know that much.

 

One of mine has 7. It's in a 4 way tie for tops in my five mile radius. It got those 7 in the first 3 days after the update. I've looked at all my caches and nothing has changed in a week. It's seems the 5-7 local cachers that are actually paying attention to this have cast their votes. The rest are busy finding caches.

 

Edit to add: I could pull 3 of my votes and put myself in the lead.

:anibad:

Edited by Don_J
Link to comment

It's not a totally meaningless stat, but I think it favors people with a small number of popular hides. I took a quick look at the person who I'm sure most cachers in my area would agree is one of the best cache hiders in the region and his score is only .81 on 164 hides.

 

Over half of his hides do not have a single favorite. Looking at many of those, they are without a doubt quality caches. But in many cases they are overshadowed by one of his more popular hides in the same general area.

 

Flawed as it is, if you have a 0.04 favorite rating it might be time to re-think your hiding philosophy.

Link to comment

Brian,

Assuming that it's the same CO that I'm thinking of, that's where a large percentage of my Favorites went. (Okay. Snat got a few votes too... As did addisonbr...)

I'm at .71. 54 favorites on 77 caches. But most of them are on one cache. I hide lots of caches that few people bother to look for. (Oh, well.) People who find them seem to enjoy them, and that's what matters to me.

So, no, I don't think that there is any great meaning with these numbers. But, they're fun!

Link to comment

It's not a good system since caches with fewer finds (like most of mine) can't get really big numbers. And this shouldn't get used for bragging purposes; remember, geocaching is NOT a competitive sport!

 

But it's kind of fun. Here is mine, for my active caches:

fizzymagic

147:40

3.675

1/20/11

Bay Area CA

Link to comment

There's several things you can do to improve your favorites to hides ratio. You can put out more "cool" caches; you can improve the quality or uniqueness of the cache hides you already have in place; or, if necessary, consider archiving caches that you believe aren't of interest in your caching community. I would recommend the two former options over the latter one.

 

medoug.

 

Can we just archive yours since you seem to be about bragging how you consider your hides better than other cachers' hides?

 

Now, to play the game:

 

7:15

0.466

01/20/11

 

Not surprising that 2 of my caches would have 0 favorites as they're standard Iraq cache hides- bison tube or altoid tin.

Surprised that for all the nice cache logs I've gotten on 3 of my hides that total over 400 finds I only got 6 favorites.

Only one of my hides in the Columbia Gorge has more than a handful of finds.

Edited by bramasoleiowa
Link to comment
and those of an infamously prolific lame-cache hider in the area:

 

I simply put that cacher on my ignore list. (as best I can) I never provide maintenance, I never Favorite, and I back up those who are slandered by these infamous people. Plus I dog them by logging NM after visiting their NM cache. For some reason the truth always annoys them.

Link to comment

hzoi

56:75

.7467

20 JAN 11

Southern Hessen, Central VA, Central AL

 

Wasn't as bad as I thought it'd be, really. Apparently we've picked up a few votes since last I looked.

 

Not counting archived caches, it's:

 

hzoi

54:44

1.23

20 JAN 11

Southern Hessen, Central VA, Central AL

 

Too bad this wasn't around three years ago, some of our now archived caches in Germany got hundreds of finds each before we shut them down.

Link to comment

It's not a totally meaningless stat, but I think it favors people with a small number of popular hides. I took a quick look at the person who I'm sure most cachers in my area would agree is one of the best cache hiders in the region and his score is only .81 on 164 hides.

 

I agree. There are a number of good cache hides in our area, but one cacher in particular puts out some really, really creative caches. Score? 0.31 on 403 caches.

Link to comment

In order to show just how meaningless this statistic is, here's my calculated ratio: 26.5

 

That is why I also requested the number of favorites to hides numbers. In your case, you have 57 favorites for 2 active caches (1 of which received 56 favorites). With a sample size of 2 active hides, I agree that it doesn't mean much. It's pretty obvious though that a lot of people liked that one particular cache.

 

As others have mentioned, this ratio probably isn't very accurate for those with a low number of hides which could easily result in a ratio of 0 or a very high number, depending on how those few caches have been received. Also, I have to agree that the length of time caches have been hidden and the number of logs they have received also would affect this number. Some very new caches haven't had a lot of opportunity to receive favorites votes yet. Some more obscure hides, may not attract very many seekers. I agree that this is FAR from an accurate measure of a hider's cache quality, but in many cases it can show a trend.

 

But, as briansnat pointed out, someone having only a handful of favorites for a huge number of caches that have been hidden for quite some time, is an indicator of how little their caches (in general) are liked. And, as Blue Duece has mentioned, most in the geocaching community has already determined that this cacher puts out lame caches after a few mediocre-at-best finds and avoid searching for their hides in the future.

 

I suggest that the ratio I have requested should be used as a ROUGH measure to determine whether you're hiding what geocache finders really want. If your ratio is high, keep up the good work, but acknowlege that there is always room for improvement. If your ratio is low, maybe you should evaluate your cache hide quality and strive for improvement on your next hides.

 

medoug.

Link to comment

Obviously, some cache hiders play the game for the numbers (most hides) at the expense of cache hide quality. I think most geocacher searchers would rather find more good caches and fewer bad caches. It would be nice if those prolific lame-cache hiders were to change their hiding philosophy and strive for high favorite numbers instead of high hide numbers.

 

medoug.

Link to comment

Obviously, some cache hiders play the game for the numbers (most hides) at the expense of cache hide quality. I think most geocacher searchers would rather find more good caches and fewer bad caches. It would be nice if those prolific lame-cache hiders were to change their hiding philosophy and strive for high favorite numbers instead of high hide numbers.

 

medoug.

I think you will find it difficult at best to get anything close to a universally accepted definition of "lame cache".

Link to comment

In order to show just how meaningless this statistic is, here's my calculated ratio: 26.5

 

That is why I also requested the number of favorites to hides numbers. In your case, you have 57 favorites for 2 active caches (1 of which received 56 favorites). With a sample size of 2 active hides, I agree that it doesn't mean much. It's pretty obvious though that a lot of people liked that one particular cache.

Whats not obvious, however, is that if the logs are to believed, the other cache should have more faves. It is well received, but rarely found since it is a puzzly multi.

 

To me, this just brings me back to a point that I was trying to make in another thread: Faves are useful in finding good caches, but they aren't the end all and be all of finding good ones and aren't awesome at pointing out the best of the best, for various reasons. They are just one more tool to use.

Link to comment

In the spirit of improving the quality of caches, not just the shear hide numbers, I'd like to hear from other hiders how you stack up as a cache hider using the new favorites system. (If you think your cache hides are on average better than most, this is a chance to brag a little too.)

 

Please give your geocaching name, number of favorites votes awarded to number of hides, calculated favorites to hides ratio, date of record, and general hiding area. Below is an example showing the numbers for myself, my brother, and those of an infamously prolific lame-cache hider in the area:

 

Entry format:

caching name

favs:hides

calculated ratio

date entered

hiding area

 

Here's my entry:

medoug

27:22

1.23 :)

1/16/11

NE IA, NW IL, SW WI

 

Here's my brother's entry:

Timber Hawk

15:7

2.14 :)

1/16/11

NE IA, SW WI

 

Here's the prolific lame-cache hider's entry:

not disclosed

22:608

0.04 :(

1/16/11

not disclosed

 

I have include the date of record because as more cachers record their favorites, the ratio is bound to go up. Feel free to update your numbers and dates in your post as time goes by.

 

Even if you don't post your number here, it might be a good time to consider how you stack up as a quality cache hider. (I'd suggest setting a personal improvement goal, but as mentioned, these numbers will naturally go up as cachers add their favorites votes.)

 

There's several things you can do to improve your favorites to hides ratio. You can put out more "cool" caches; you can improve the quality or uniqueness of the cache hides you already have in place; or, if necessary, consider archiving caches that you believe aren't of interest in your caching community. I would recommend the two former options over the latter one.

 

medoug.

 

Here is one other thing to note... or to add in...

 

Number of finds each cache has.

 

Example...

 

A cache that has had only 10 finds may only have 1 favorite, or none at all. While a cache hide that has had 500 finds may only have 1 or 2 maybe even 3 favorites.

 

A cache hide that has had 500 finds has also probably been published for a while, where a cache hide that has only 10 finds may have just been placed a month or two ago.

 

So you could say... yeah I got 50 hides... and 60 favorites... Wooo hoo... but of your 50 hides you have had 2000 finds..

 

where someone else may have 100 hides... 1000 finds and 90 favorites...

 

Thus WHO is the better cache hider?

 

So maybe in your list... people should add total number of finds of all their caches (together) and give a ratio of Favorites to total number of finds.

 

Example...

 

50 caches... 500 finds... AVerage of 10 finds per cache. 30 favorites..

 

So you have a ration of 30:500

or in this case a number of 3:50

 

TGC

Edited by texasgrillchef
Link to comment

As far as "lame caches" go...

 

One should never forget. A cache that is lame to me, might not be lame to you & Vice versa.

 

Example...

 

one cache took me & my wife to this sculpture in the DFW metroplex. I thought it was a lame sculpture and a lame hide because the place it took me to was lame, and the "Search" factor of the cache was lame as well.

 

On the other hand... My wife "LOVED" the sculpture and thought that the cache took her to a wonderfull spot, She liked the container, which I admit was quite clever. She didnt' care how it was hidden.

 

Thus lame for me... Great for my wife. However, as lame as I thought it was, I did like the cache for making my wife happy though. I give it credit for doing that! LOL

 

TGC

Link to comment

To me, this just brings me back to a point that I was trying to make in another thread: Faves are useful in finding good caches, but they aren't the end all and be all of finding good ones and aren't awesome at pointing out the best of the best, for various reasons. They are just one more tool to use.

 

I agree 100%... simply because what is a favorite cache for me. Might not be for you. Even if a cache has been favorited 10 times, it might be for 10 different reasons.

 

I have favorited a cache simply cause I liked it's container, or liked the location it took me too, or becasue I like how it was hidden in a very clever manner.

 

I even favorited a cache, because if it's one of those so called "bad weather" days & you want a cache to get. This cache was a great cache for those so called "Bad weather" days.

 

The Favorites features IS a good feature to have, but like you said. Is not the end all to everything. It's just one peice of a larger puzzle that one should use in determining if the cache you want to hunt will be one that you might like or not.

 

Here's one other thing to note... I have almost 150+ favorites I haven't even used yet... I wonder how many others are out their like that as well?

 

TGC

Link to comment
Here is one other thing to note... or to add in...

 

Number of finds each cache has.

 

Example...

 

A cache that has had only 10 finds may only have 1 favorite, or none at all. While a cache hide that has had 500 finds may only have 1 or 2 maybe even 3 favorites.

 

A cache hide that has had 500 finds has also probably been published for a while, where a cache hide that has only 10 finds may have just been placed a month or two ago.

 

So you could say... yeah I got 50 hides... and 60 favorites... Wooo hoo... but of your 50 hides you have had 2000 finds..

 

where someone else may have 100 hides... 1000 finds and 90 favorites...

 

Thus WHO is the better cache hider?

 

So maybe in your list... people should add total number of finds of all their caches (together) and give a ratio of Favorites to total number of finds.

 

On the surface you'd think so. But also consider that older caches with a lot of finds may have a significant percentage of finders who are no longer active and will not be rating caches. I took a look at one high quality, old cache in my area and almost 1/3 of the finders are no longer active geocachers. Another good chunk are only marginally active these days.

 

Also there is a segment of cachers who won't take the time to go back and favorite their older finds, but will use favorites going forward. One poster already admitted to doing that. I have 800 some finds and it took me some time to add favorites. Imagine the time investment necessary for someone with 10,000 finds. I'm sure some just won't bother which further shortchanges older caches.

 

So if you have Cacher A who has been hiding caches for 7 years and has 50 caches with 2,000 finds and Cacher B who has been caching for 2 years and has the same stats, whose finds are more likely to have been made by currently active cachers?

 

Throw in Cacher C who is known for her high quality caches. She has 48 caches with 2,000 finds. She also has two run of the mill guardrail micros that have 1,000 finds between them with no favorites. Her numbers are going to be totally skewed by those two caches.

Link to comment

Oh goodness gracious....people, relax....this is just one more nuance to the geocaching game...I have 18 caches, many with favorite points and I made these fun, creative containers because I like the idea of a cacher finding them and then laughing out loud or thinking "Hey, cool container."

So, I like the favorite system...so I receive a little bit of encouragement and recognition....quit trying to wreck my fun by knocking the Favorite Point system...if you don't like it, then ignore it...otherwise, let me have my fun for the day...geesh.....

Link to comment

Kind of a fun stat, although it could be tweaked as per the discussion.

 

87/42

2.07

 

22 of my 42 are archived. I have only 1 single favorite vote on one of those 22. Despite some of the recent threads around here, I do not believe very many people are favoriting archived caches. I know I'm not, nor do I have any plans to. ;) If I ever get an archival notice on a cache in my 50 mile radius that I have favorited, I'd probably even take the point back.

Link to comment

Oh goodness gracious....people, relax....this is just one more nuance to the geocaching game...I have 18 caches, many with favorite points and I made these fun, creative containers because I like the idea of a cacher finding them and then laughing out loud or thinking "Hey, cool container."

So, I like the favorite system...so I receive a little bit of encouragement and recognition....quit trying to wreck my fun by knocking the Favorite Point system...if you don't like it, then ignore it...otherwise, let me have my fun for the day...geesh.....

 

I honestly adore the idea of someone with only 8 posts being the voice of reason. Thank you, seriously.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...