GC1Y4WW Lamp post cache

[+mcbeefer]

I came across this cache while reading in the forums. First of all me being in Wyoming I'll probably never make it down to Dallas to even take a shot at finding it. I'm just wondering what other ideas other people might have on it. I am thinking this cache possibly needs some out of the "box thinking" ie out of the park? My thoughts are that that there are far more ways that lines from the 4 lamp posts mentioned in the description could cross to the point where the cache should be. Seems like everyone has been concentrating their efforts inside the park and with this cache being 2 years old with no finds makes you go hmmmmmm.

 

So what are your thoughts?

 

I take that back after all of that reading I missed the first line that " it is in the grass area"

Edited October 27, 2011 by mcbeefer

[+mpilchfamily]

Its not a good idea to get help on a cache in the forums. Its considered bad form. If you want help or hints you should talk to the CO about them. Don't post them in a public forum.

[+mcbeefer]

Its not a good idea to get help on a cache in the forums. Its considered bad form. If you want help or hints you should talk to the CO about them. Don't post them in a public forum.

Kinda figured I'd get a responce like that. My bad I guess. Like I said earlier I'll never be going to this cache. Just curious.

[+lamoracke]

wish that cache was in my area to search for it once.

[jholly]

Calling Nomex!

 

It ain't there.

[+dphickey]

This is a case of someone getting joy out of no one finding their cache.....

[+dfx]

If I understand this correctly, this isn't a proper geocache, as you don't need coordinates/GPS to find it...

[jholly]

This is a case of someone getting joy out of no one finding their cache.....

 

If I understand this correctly, this isn't a proper geocache, as you don't need coordinates/GPS to find it...

 

There is no cache to find, and since there is no cache to find it doesn't matter if you use a GPS or not.

[knowschad]

Its not a good idea to get help on a cache in the forums. Its considered bad form. If you want help or hints you should talk to the CO about them. Don't post them in a public forum.

Kinda figured I'd get a responce like that. My bad I guess. Like I said earlier I'll never be going to this cache. Just curious.

 

The problem is not that you might be going for the cache, but that somebody that will be might be reading this thread. I hope you understand.

[+SwineFlew]

Calling Nomex!

 

It ain't there.

 

Or Hemlock.

[knowschad]

That cache has been mentioned here before, I'm sure, but a search for the waypoint code here didn't turn anything up. I'm sure that I've seen the cache before, though.

[+tozainamboku]

That cache has been mentioned here before, I'm sure, but a search for the waypoint code here didn't turn anything up. I'm sure that I've seen the cache before, though.

 

**** SPOILER ALERT ******

 

It was mentioned in the Lamppost thread.

[+sbell111]

Ventura Kids needs to not leave notes on the pages of caches that he hasn't attempted.

[+mcbeefer]

**** SPOILER ALERT ******

 

It was mentioned in the Lamppost thread.

 

Yep that’s the one I seen it in.

 

I understand that its bad form but what is the difference between a group working on it at the location and people talking about it here. In all seriousness I doubt anything said here will actually lead to it being found...... if it is even there. It didn't even cross my mind that it might not even be there for some reason I took it for granted that everyone would actually put a cache out when they list one.

 

I’m sure that if it is there theoretically with a lot of math you could come up with Coords for every possible location of the cache in that field.

 

Anyhow I found this cache to be interesting and it is something diffrent to talk about besides all the "I hate this type of cache" that I seen way too much in the threads.

[I!]

I’m sure that if it is there theoretically with a lot of math you could come up with Coords for every possible location of the cache in that field.

There's already a plot, attached to a log, of the various possible intersections. It seems there are far too many to check in situ, though checking the intersections near the plotted cross-hair would be doable. (Whether or not the cross-hair is at all close to the cache location is anyone's guess, though.)

[+mcbeefer]

Any how my hats off to H2GUY for a unique cache. Anyone know of any other puzzle caches that have been out for a while but have yet to be found?

[+sbell111]

I understand that its bad form but what is the difference between a group working on it at the location and people talking about it here.

The difference is that a group's conversation is private to that group while a post in this thread lives on to be referenced by anyone at any time in the future.

In all seriousness I doubt anything said here will actually lead to it being found...... if it is even there. It didn't even cross my mind that it might not even be there for some reason I took it for granted that everyone would actually put a cache out when they list one.

I took a read of the cache page and I saw nothing that led me to believe that the cache wasn't in place. I did notice, however, that many of the DNFers were not adequately prepared for the challenge.

I’m sure that if it is there theoretically with a lot of math you could come up with Coords for every possible location of the cache in that field.

A cache like this one likely needs greater granularity than a listing of potential coordinates would provide.

Anyhow I found this cache to be interesting and it is something diffrent to talk about besides all the "I hate this type of cache" that I seen way too much in the threads.

Agreed. If this were a hypothetical discussion of how one could hide or find such a cache without being a discussion about this specific cache, it would have made for a fine thread. Edited October 27, 2011 by sbell111

[+addisonbr]

I understand that its bad form but what is the difference between a group working on it at the location and people talking about it here.

Best idea may be to shoot the CO a quick note and see if he minds if you start a thread on the subject in the forums... He may well be flattered and think that it's fine.

[knowschad]

I understand that its bad form but what is the difference between a group working on it at the location and people talking about it here.

Best idea may be to shoot the CO a quick note and see if he minds if you start a thread on the subject in the forums... He may well be flattered and think that it's fine.

 

Great idea!

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Theortically, I think the best way to find a cache where you need to determine the intersection of two lines (in close proximity), would be to use a couple of laser pointers (green prefered over red) vice kite string. You'd be able to go through the large number of combinations much quicker than using string.

 

I'd also have some sort of graphic or tabular representation of each combo, checking them off as they were checked.

[+jellis]

Theortically, I think the best way to find a cache where you need to determine the intersection of two lines (in close proximity), would be to use a couple of laser pointers (green prefered over red) vice kite string. You'd be able to go through the large number of combinations much quicker than using string.

 

I'd also have some sort of graphic or tabular representation of each combo, checking them off as they were checked.

From looking at the cache page there is an image of a drawing of intersections. Plus the CO himself said he used a laser to find it to confirm it was there.

I know the fastest way to find it but it wouldn't be fair.

No it doesn't involve plowing up the grass.

Edited October 27, 2011 by jellis

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Theortically, I think the best way to find a cache where you need to determine the intersection of two lines (in close proximity), would be to use a couple of laser pointers (green prefered over red) vice kite string. You'd be able to go through the large number of combinations much quicker than using string.

 

I'd also have some sort of graphic or tabular representation of each combo, checking them off as they were checked.

From looking at the cache page there is an image of a drawing of intersections. Plus the CO himself said he used a laser to find it to confirm it was there.

I know the fastest way to find it but it wouldn't be fair.

No it doesn't involve plowing up the grass.

 

Metal detector?

[+mcbeefer]

I have e-mailed the CO of this cache to make sure it is ok with him to talk about his cache. I'll let you know what I hear back.

[+popokiiti]

I'm impressed with the number of folks who posted their DNFs.Good for them.

[+SwineFlew]

Theortically, I think the best way to find a cache where you need to determine the intersection of two lines (in close proximity), would be to use a couple of laser pointers (green prefered over red) vice kite string. You'd be able to go through the large number of combinations much quicker than using string.

 

I'd also have some sort of graphic or tabular representation of each combo, checking them off as they were checked.

From looking at the cache page there is an image of a drawing of intersections. Plus the CO himself said he used a laser to find it to confirm it was there.

I know the fastest way to find it but it wouldn't be fair.

No it doesn't involve plowing up the grass.

 

Mowing the grass really short?

[+jellis]

Theortically, I think the best way to find a cache where you need to determine the intersection of two lines (in close proximity), would be to use a couple of laser pointers (green prefered over red) vice kite string. You'd be able to go through the large number of combinations much quicker than using string.

 

I'd also have some sort of graphic or tabular representation of each combo, checking them off as they were checked.

From looking at the cache page there is an image of a drawing of intersections. Plus the CO himself said he used a laser to find it to confirm it was there.

I know the fastest way to find it but it wouldn't be fair.

No it doesn't involve plowing up the grass.

nope but can't mention it here on the forum either.

 

Mowing the grass really short?

[+mcbeefer]

I got an e-mail back from H2GUY and he has no problem with us discussing his cache on the forums.

 

With that said it is pretty funny how the number of people watching this cache jumped from 79 and 80 when a friend of mine and myself clicked watch this cache up to now 91 in the last couple days.

[+WRASTRO]

I got an e-mail back from H2GUY and he has no problem with us discussing his cache on the forums.

 

With that said it is pretty funny how the number of people watching this cache jumped from 79 and 80 when a friend of mine and myself clicked watch this cache up to now 91 in the last couple days.

I do not find it surprising that a few of the forum folks may have added the cache to their watch lists. It is an unsolved puzzle and people will want to know when it is finally solved.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I understand that its bad form but what is the difference between a group working on it at the location and people talking about it here.

 

And more importantly, the TOS specifically forbids the publication of information that might be considered a spoiler in a public forum. An exchange between a group working on it at a location, or collaborating on a solution via email is not a public forum. However, as the CO has granted consent to discuss the cache here, and the Terms of Use reads "Publish, in any form of media, the solutions, hints, spoilers, or any hidden coordinates for any geocache without consent from the cache owner.", it's a moot point.

 

A couple of years ago I came across a cache listing for a mystery cache in rural Indiana. Unless I missed something, it appeared that the "puzzle" was that the cache was located within 2 square miles of the published coordinates on a guard rail but there was no information which indicated *which* guardrail on which it was located anything to derive the actual coordinates of the cache.

[+addisonbr]

A couple of years ago I came across a cache listing for a mystery cache in rural Indiana. Unless I missed something, it appeared that the "puzzle" was that the cache was located within 2 square miles of the published coordinates on a guard rail but there was no information which indicated *which* guardrail on which it was located anything to derive the actual coordinates of the cache.

If that was a piece of a bigger and more involved overall mystery - maybe a nationwide contest with interesting prizes, or an immersive ARG of some sort - I could actually be intrigued by something along those lines. But a simple geocache, I don't really find that compelling.

[+addisonbr]

I do not find it surprising that a few of the forum folks may have added the cache to their watch lists. It is an unsolved puzzle and people will want to know when it is finally solved.

Guilty.

[knowschad]

Ventura Kids needs to not leave notes on the pages of caches that he hasn't attempted.

 

Why is that?

[+sbell111]

Ventura Kids needs to not leave notes on the pages of caches that he hasn't attempted.

 

Why is that?

Because tptb have made it very clear that cache pages are not forums and should not be used as such.

[+tozainamboku]

Ventura Kids needs to not leave notes on the pages of caches that he hasn't attempted.

 

Why is that?

Because tptb have made it very clear that cache pages are not forums and should not be used as such.

Cache owners can remove any logs that are "off-topic".

[+CanadianRockies]

Cache owners can remove any logs that are "off-topic".

But they don't define "off-topic." Until they can "draw a line that everyone can live with" how can we accept such a guideline?

[+sbell111]

Ventura Kids needs to not leave notes on the pages of caches that he hasn't attempted.

 

Why is that?

Because tptb have made it very clear that cache pages are not forums and should not be used as such.

Cache owners can remove any logs that are "off-topic".

The mere fact that cache owners can delete such posts does not make them acceptable.

[+sbell111]

Cache owners can remove any logs that are "off-topic".

But they don't define "off-topic." Until they can "draw a line that everyone can live with" how can we accept such a guideline?

Because we enjoy playing the game more than having forum discussions via the cache pages?

Edited October 28, 2011 by sbell111

[+power69]

Any how my hats off to H2GUY for a unique cache. Anyone know of any other puzzle caches that have been out for a while but have yet to be found?

Knock yourself out

it needs more people watching it.

[+mcbeefer]

Any how my hats off to H2GUY for a unique cache. Anyone know of any other puzzle caches that have been out for a while but have yet to be found?

Knock yourself out

it needs more people watching it.

 

HAHA added to my watch list

[+CanadianRockies]

Cache owners can remove any logs that are "off-topic".

But they don't define "off-topic." Until they can "draw a line that everyone can live with" how can we accept such a guideline?

Because we enjoy playing the game more than having forum discussions via the cache pages?

Chill. I was just yanking toz's chain a bit to show how easy it is to be a lone rebel when you don't have to live in the real world. That's why I included the LOL icon.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Ventura Kids needs to not leave notes on the pages of caches that he hasn't attempted.

 

Why is that?

Because tptb have made it very clear that cache pages are not forums and should not be used as such.

Cache owners can remove any logs that are "off-topic".

The mere fact that cache owners can delete such posts does not make them acceptable.

 

+1

 

I remember when people first started complaining about UCE (Unsolicited Commercial Email; aka SPAM). There were many which said, "if you don't want to read it, just delete". I think it's pretty obvious how well that strategy has worked out.

[+TerraViators]

Theortically, I think the best way to find a cache where you need to determine the intersection of two lines (in close proximity), would be to use a couple of laser pointers (green prefered over red) vice kite string. You'd be able to go through the large number of combinations much quicker than using string.

 

I'd also have some sort of graphic or tabular representation of each combo, checking them off as they were checked.

From looking at the cache page there is an image of a drawing of intersections. Plus the CO himself said he used a laser to find it to confirm it was there.

I know the fastest way to find it but it wouldn't be fair.

No it doesn't involve plowing up the grass.

 

Metal detector?

I tried using a metal detector. My guess is it's not metal. I know for a fact that a small area had been isolated by other geocachers who have placed geocaches too close and were told they were so many feet away from it. I've seen the area that was isolated and mocked up in GPSvisualizer.

Edited November 27, 2011 by TerraViators

[Mr.Yuck]

Theortically, I think the best way to find a cache where you need to determine the intersection of two lines (in close proximity), would be to use a couple of laser pointers (green prefered over red) vice kite string. You'd be able to go through the large number of combinations much quicker than using string.

 

I'd also have some sort of graphic or tabular representation of each combo, checking them off as they were checked.

From looking at the cache page there is an image of a drawing of intersections. Plus the CO himself said he used a laser to find it to confirm it was there.

I know the fastest way to find it but it wouldn't be fair.

No it doesn't involve plowing up the grass.

 

Metal detector?

I tried using a metal detector. My guess is it's not metal. I know for a fact that a small area had been isolated by other geocachers who have placed geocaches too close and were told they were so many feet away from it. I've seen the area that was isolated and mocked up in GPSvisualizer.

 

Oh boy, I don't know about the ethics of that one, trying to place other caches to see how far you are. Well, who knows, maybe the CO doesn't care.

 

You know who I'm curious to know of that may care though? The neighbors. There's a pretty recent pic on the cache page of a group hunt, with all their string in the field. In full view of several pretty nice houses. What do you think about this having been there, TV? Any issues, or do they all know and are OK?

 

P.S. This hiding method is not new, found one myself. They are brutal even if they're traditional caches with given coordinates.

[+TerraViators]

Theortically, I think the best way to find a cache where you need to determine the intersection of two lines (in close proximity), would be to use a couple of laser pointers (green prefered over red) vice kite string. You'd be able to go through the large number of combinations much quicker than using string.

 

I'd also have some sort of graphic or tabular representation of each combo, checking them off as they were checked.

From looking at the cache page there is an image of a drawing of intersections. Plus the CO himself said he used a laser to find it to confirm it was there.

I know the fastest way to find it but it wouldn't be fair.

No it doesn't involve plowing up the grass.

 

Metal detector?

I tried using a metal detector. My guess is it's not metal. I know for a fact that a small area had been isolated by other geocachers who have placed geocaches too close and were told they were so many feet away from it. I've seen the area that was isolated and mocked up in GPSvisualizer.

 

Oh boy, I don't know about the ethics of that one, trying to place other caches to see how far you are. Well, who knows, maybe the CO doesn't care.

 

You know who I'm curious to know of that may care though? The neighbors. There's a pretty recent pic on the cache page of a group hunt, with all their string in the field. In full view of several pretty nice houses. What do you think about this having been there, TV? Any issues, or do they all know and are OK?

 

P.S. This hiding method is not new, found one myself. They are brutal even if they're traditional caches with given coordinates.

When my group searched a couple of months ago, about half of the houses were under construction and it was early on a Saturday morning. There was alot of noise due to the nail guns, saws, etc. A few cars drove by but they didn't seem at all interested in us with our kite string, metal detectors and utility flags. A neighbor did come over and asked if we were geocaching and was interested. As far as I know the neighbors are not upset about the hunts.

[+TerraViators]

There's also been talk that the cache doesn't exist. I don't buy it. H2GUY has a couple other outrageous hides in the area that have been found. I personally don't know him, but I don't think it's his style. I do think he enjoys his hides being DNF magnets, but nothing more than that.

 

For a rumored metroplex candidate of a possible phantom cache and alot of good caching angst, check out GC116MN.

[+TL&MinBHIL]

Just out of curiosity (since I'll never go there) for those who have been to this one, is it safe to say the cache is buried? I mean, it's somewhere within this open grassy area, not visible to the naked eye, where else could it be? And if so, it would be in violation of the guidelines for placing a cache. Not that that matters too much because plenty of people give it a shot without complaining.

[AZcachemeister]

Just out of curiosity (since I'll never go there) for those who have been to this one, is it safe to say the cache is buried? I mean, it's somewhere within this open grassy area, not visible to the naked eye, where else could it be? And if so, it would be in violation of the guidelines for placing a cache. Not that that matters too much because plenty of people give it a shot without complaining.

 

It's a micro-centrifuge tube stuck in the turf.

Is that enough of a spoiler?

[+Chokecherry]

I found one akin to that with purposely soft coordinates. Never again. Did not find that experience pleasurable at all.

[+Sol seaker]

Just out of curiosity (since I'll never go there) for those who have been to this one, is it safe to say the cache is buried? I mean, it's somewhere within this open grassy area, not visible to the naked eye, where else could it be? And if so, it would be in violation of the guidelines for placing a cache. Not that that matters too much because plenty of people give it a shot without complaining.

 

He says it's in the grassy "area"; he doesn't say it's in the grass.

"Area" is a word that can mean a lot of things.

 

My guess is that people are taking what he says too literally. I think if he meant it literally someone would have found it by now.

 

People are also assigning meaning to his remarks about kite string and lamp posts. He doesn't say it's at an intersection, people are assuming that.

I think for this cache at this point, all assumptions are off.

 

But then again, I'm just assuming that.

[+W4G_SOTAGoat]

 

He says it's in the grassy "area"; he doesn't say it's in the grass.

"Area" is a word that can mean a lot of things.

 

My guess is that people are taking what he says too literally. I think if he meant it literally someone would have found it by now.

 

People are also assigning meaning to his remarks about kite string and lamp posts. He doesn't say it's at an intersection, people are assuming that.

I think for this cache at this point, all assumptions are off.

 

But then again, I'm just assuming that.

 

Four lamp posts and "several hundred yards" of kite string? I don't really see any other way of interpreting it.

 

If this is indeed the case, it would almost be as easy to manually search using a grid method. There would be an intersection every few feet if you used all permutations of available lines between posts to form intersections.