A true D3

[+CachinStrattons]

I have noticed that the few D3's that I have ran into, don't really seem at all to me to be a true 3, going by the knowledge base guidelines (ie, possible multiple trips, blends well with environment, could take an experienced cacher an afternoon, etc). I am trying an experiment. It started as a D2.5 experiment, but that has changed to D3... I have a fist-sized container, hidden in a local scenic stop with a plaque, shrubs, etc. Approximately 500 sq. feet of the hillside is covered in local sandstone, varying in size from baseball-ish to "open-arm hug" size. The container is placed in a crevice among the stone, with another small fist-sized stone sitting on top of it. You have to reach about elbow-deep into the hole to get the cache, but even then, you cannot see it. The container itself was sanded roughly, then painted and textured using Outdoor Texturing Paint... In short, you can't see the cache, and it feels like everything else around you.

 

The coords were verified multiple times by myself, and another local cacher. Of the people who have found the cache, only one logger has done so without a hint from myself. A couple of very experienced, local cachers returned 3-5 times before finding it after a hint.

 

I guess what I want to know is... How many D3's have you found, and can you estimate how many of them met even ONE of the knowledge base guidelines for a 3 difficulty? I love a challenge, and my biggest gripe is probably improper difficulty/terrain ratings. I don't get to go for time-consuming caches all THAT often, but darn it, when I plan one and find it in 10 minutes... It's like, "Crap... what do I do now?"

 

3's... Do they exist, or is it like Chupacabra?

[+StarBrand]

IMHO - Lots of caches are overrated for difficulty by the strict definitions and rating tool.

 

Its rare that you find a cache rated at 3 or higher that actually fits the definition. BTW - I think your cache should be a 4 by the clayjar system reffered to on the submission page.

 

* Cache is in plain sight or location is fairly obvious.

 

** Cache could be in one of several locations. Hunter may have to look for a while.

 

*** Cache may be very well hidden, may be multi-leg, or may use clues to location.

 

**** Cache likely requires special skills, knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days or trips to find.

 

***** Finding this cache requires very specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment. This is a serious mental or physical challenge

[+CachinStrattons]

IMHO - Lots of caches are overrated for difficulty by the strict definitions and rating tool.

 

Its rare that you find a cache rated at 3 or higher that actually fits the definition. BTW - I think your cache should be a 4 by the clayjar system reffered to on the submission page.

 

* Cache is in plain sight or location is fairly obvious.

 

** Cache could be in one of several locations. Hunter may have to look for a while.

 

*** Cache may be very well hidden, may be multi-leg, or may use clues to location.

 

**** Cache likely requires special skills, knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days or trips to find.

 

***** Finding this cache requires very specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment. This is a serious mental or physical challenge

 

You know what, I hadn't noted that before. I think I may actually be the one "under-rating," rather than the opposite. Strange thing is, the only qualifier on my cache for the D4 is the multiple trips... I REALLY didn't think it would take multiple trips to find, but that repeatedly seems to be the case. There are several more who have tried, but not found... They just told me personally and apparently don't log DNF's, but we're not getting into that.

 

I'll have to watch the cache for a while and see what happens. If this continues, I guess I'll have to up the difficulty again. I really didn't expect this one to be that hard - It's crazy.

[+fizzymagic]

I REALLY didn't think it would take multiple trips to find, but that repeatedly seems to be the case.

Your perception of how hard a cache is to find (given that, as hider, you know where it is) is not always reliable.

 

Your hide sounds like a needle in a haystack hide. If it is, then the rating you pick is essentially random, since the main factor in finding the cache is luck.

 

Oh, and have you re-verified your coordinates? Needle-in-a-haystack hides with bad coords are notoriously difficult to find.

[+Ecylram]

Based on the description, that would probably be at least a 4* in our area.

[+SwineFlew]

Around here. a 4 stars will be common for a cache like that.

[+CachinStrattons]

So I AM under-rating! Do more agree???

 

Well, this wasn't exactly the lesson I was going for here, but it's a lesson none-the-less. I've been trying to be difficult with my hides... More like in the terrain department, but this one was more of an active area cache, so I went for difficulty. Looks like I'll have to re-evaluate my D ratings.

 

Thanks for the feedback!!!

[+popokiiti]

With the camouflage affecting the feel of your cache, and making it blend in so well, I think we'd probably see it rated as a 3* to start, maybe going up to 3.5* and if there are still a few cachers reporting difficulties/DNFs up to a 4*, but no higher.

[+Don_J]

I guess what I want to know is... How many D3's have you found, and can you estimate how many of them met even ONE of the knowledge base guidelines for a 3 difficulty? I love a challenge, and my biggest gripe is probably improper difficulty/terrain ratings. I don't get to go for time-consuming caches all THAT often, but darn it, when I plan one and find it in 10 minutes... It's like, "Crap... what do I do now?"

 

3's... Do they exist, or is it like Chupacabra?

 

I have found 114 D3 caches. A quick scan tells me that a lot of them were nanos or micros hidden in the obvious spot. One was an event in a city park.

 

Quite a few others were in plain site but cammoed in a way that it took a long time, or several tries to find then. I would consider them to be true D3s.

 

I own six active D3s. Five of them were adjusted up because of finder comments. I placed a D4 that the first two finders spent less than a minute looking for it. I eventually brought it down to a two. I thought I was pretty clever, but never underestimate an experienced geocacher. It's still my most highly praised cache, even though it turned out to be pretty easy.

Edited April 22, 2011 by Don_J

[+A & J Tooling]

I only have a few finds but so far but they've all been overrated in my book. But, if the person who hides them feels they deserve that rating due to their preception, so be it.

[+CachinStrattons]

So, at least I'm not TOTALLY off-base here. Adjusting the difficulty after field-testing seems to be common. I don't feel so bad now!

[+GeoGeeBee]

I have a fist-sized container, hidden in a local scenic stop with a plaque, shrubs, etc. Approximately 500 sq. feet of the hillside is covered in local sandstone, varying in size from baseball-ish to "open-arm hug" size. The container is placed in a crevice among the stone, with another small fist-sized stone sitting on top of it. You have to reach about elbow-deep into the hole to get the cache, but even then, you cannot see it. The container itself was sanded roughly, then painted and textured using Outdoor Texturing Paint... In short, you can't see the cache, and it feels like everything else around you.

 

 

Frankly, I don't get why anyone would do this. And I, for one, would log the DNF and never find it. I don't stick my hands into places I can't see.

[+A & J Tooling]

I found my first cache where I had to insert my hand into a spot that I could not see into. Luckily I have tools for just such a situation. Needless to say, I found the cache but the cache suffered some slight damage due to my extraction process.

[+tomfuller & Quill]

I have 66 D3's covering all of the terrain ratings. At least half of them were rated correctly.

To complete the Fizzy challenge, I need to find some 4.5 difficulty caches.

There are a few too many puzzles that I can't seem to figure out.