Jump to content

5/5?


Recommended Posts

I recently walked past 2 5/5/caches, but as I was alone and in Wellies passed on them. That said, I could have got them (I certainly could see them both) but it wasn't worth it. No specialist equipment was needed and although I am Vertiginous, I reckon I'll be able to get them. Locally we also have 5/5 caches where all you need is a canoe, boat or rubber dinghy that you can get from a bucket and spade shop; so my point is this.

What is a 5/5 cache?

Personally as a reasonably able (only because I am young(ish) and not because I am fit) person, I do not think I will ever do a "proper" 5/5 cache. I am not skilled in diving, pot-holing, mountaineering etc. and when there, I expect to have to search a bit too, so what, I ask is a 5/5? Maybe the guidelines need changing or maybe they need to be publicised better? I don't know, hence the post. Tell me. Am I wrong to scoff these so-called 5/5s?

Link to comment

I recently walked past 2 5/5/caches, but as I was alone and in Wellies passed on them. That said, I could have got them (I certainly could see them both) but it wasn't worth it. No specialist equipment was needed and although I am Vertiginous, I reckon I'll be able to get them. Locally we also have 5/5 caches where all you need is a canoe, boat or rubber dinghy that you can get from a bucket and spade shop; so my point is this.

What is a 5/5 cache?

Personally as a reasonably able (only because I am young(ish) and not because I am fit) person, I do not think I will ever do a "proper" 5/5 cache. I am not skilled in diving, pot-holing, mountaineering etc. and when there, I expect to have to search a bit too, so what, I ask is a 5/5? Maybe the guidelines need changing or maybe they need to be publicised better? I don't know, hence the post. Tell me. Am I wrong to scoff these so-called 5/5s?

The highest rated cache I've done was a 4.5/4, and to be honest I didn't think it justified that high a rating. The cache in question was one of a series of twelve which varied in size & difficulty. Finding it really wasn't what I could have expected, as it was quite a straightforward find.

I do find that a fairly common 'contributing factor' to highly rated caches is quite simply that the co-ord's are poor - deliberately so. This added to a clue / hint which is so ambiguous as to be of little use. In fact there are several series of caches not too far from my home that fall into this category, set by the same person. Needless to say I tend not to play the CO's game... and leave these caches alone. I have only placed 16 caches, but they were all set with the intention of them being able to be found... and not to end as DNF's!

Just personal opinions you understand, just personal opinions.

Edited by Croesgadwr
Link to comment

The ratings on caches are down to the cache setters/hiders own personal opinion, although there is a Groundspeak resource available to assist in achieving some sense of commonality across the board. The ratings are just a guide and can be set to whatever you so desire - the last time I queried it I got the answer that Groundspeak do not enforce anything about them, but would prefer them to be used sensibly.

 

From my understanding, the requirement of specialist equipment such as a Kayak, climbing gear, ladder, scuba, speedo's, etc... equates to a five terrain rating and I have used that on several of my caches.

 

Jon.

Link to comment

I have come across several series where the bonus cache has been rated as a 5/5, simply because you have to complete the others in the series to be able to find it. May be some further guidance is needed or some kind of 'pop-up' when you try to give a cache a rating of 5/5? The game has morphed so much over the years and (some) caches have become more ingenious and inventive. Perhaps it is time to redefine the ratings structure?

Link to comment

The ratings on caches are down to the cache setters/hiders own personal opinion, although there is a Groundspeak resource available to assist in achieving some sense of commonality across the board. The ratings are just a guide and can be set to whatever you so desire - the last time I queried it I got the answer that Groundspeak do not enforce anything about them, but would prefer them to be used sensibly.

 

From my understanding, the requirement of specialist equipment such as a Kayak, climbing gear, ladder, scuba, speedo's, etc... equates to a five terrain rating and I have used that on several of my caches.

 

Jon.

 

Oooooooh.......Speedo's.

How am I supposed to work now?

Link to comment

Given that there are only 5 stars available to cover everything from a cache you can roll up to in a wheelchair and retrieve, right up to those require a deep dive or abseiling from a cliff, then there is inevitably going to be a wide variation within each star rating. Add in the fact that choosing the rating is going to be somewhat subjective on the part of the CO and the ratings can vary wildly.

 

I've only done 1 5/5 and TBH I reckon it was rated correctly, but is nowhere near as difficult as a diving/climbing cache. I also recently did one T4 cache which was up an old railway embankment which my 76 year old Mother in law would have been able to walk up, I noted that I thought the rating was too high but it remains.

 

At the end of the day it's not worth getting worked up about, and if you really want the challenging 5/5's then it comes down to reading the cache page and previous logs and working out for yourself how difficult it is.

 

Edit to add:

Having just reread the original post, I think there is perhaps a case for having something additional in the ratings to cover caches which not only need specialist equipment, which could be as simple as a "toy" inflatable boat, but also needs specialist skills such as Scuba diving, mountaineering or abseiling.

Edited by MartyBartfast
Link to comment

Oooooooh.......Speedo's.

How am I supposed to work now?

 

Would you prefer the phrase budgie smugglers? :unsure::lol:

 

Jon

Tut, tut, tut. With your Budgie Smugglers and Mandy's metal knickers, this forum is a bad influence on the likes of me. I'm a good girl me, I dont smoke, misbehave, drink wine or nutt'n :laughing: .

Marty has a good point. Reading the cache page would be one way of filtering out the true 5/5's from the questionable ones. An obvious and simple way around the problem. Anyone who is serious about seeking out these particular caches will almost certainly do that before they embark anyway. Wont they?

Link to comment

Be honest, how many caches are both 5 terrain and 5 difficulty. If I can see a cache in a tree then whatever the terrain might be, how is that a 5 difficulty? I just don't get it.

It's not like you have to search much is it?

I'm not really bothered and I will soon have a couple of 5/5s on my matrix so that's all good. For the extreme cachers though it might be a little disappointing to see these ones appearing.

Link to comment

Tut, tut, tut. With your Budgie Smugglers and Mandy's metal knickers, this forum is a bad influence on the likes of me. I'm a good girl me, I dont smoke, misbehave, drink wine or nutt'n :laughing: .

Marty has a good point. Reading the cache page would be one way of filtering out the true 5/5's from the questionable ones. An obvious and simple way around the problem. Anyone who is serious about seeking out these particular caches will almost certainly do that before they embark anyway. Wont they?

 

Ohh... Poor Mandy, they must chafe terribly :huh:

 

I think the cache attributes are also a good indication of the cache status, again, if they have been used sensibly. It still surprised me how many folks attempt a cache of mine that is five terrain, clearly has a "BOAT NEEDED" attribute and even a big picture a Kayak on the main page, yet they still log DNF's or NOTES saying, didn't realise you needed a boat....

 

Jon.

Link to comment

A geocache has two 'rateable' attributes; Difficulty and Terrain. Each can be rated from 1 star to 5 stars in half star steps.... That's the easy bit that we all know. The problem has always been satisfactorily defining and separating the two attributes. What constitutes a 'difficult' cache; what necessitates a high 'terrain' rating and does a high rating in one automatically mean a high rating in the other? There have been a lot of 5 / 5 caches set that did not deserve a high rating in both but the cache owners gained some perceived 'kudos' from setting a 5 / 5 cache. My personal view is that 'Difficulty' should be rated on how hard it is to find the actual box once you have reached the cache's location. This includes solving any puzzle that might be needed to determine the cache's co-ordinates.

The 'Terrain' should be rated on how difficult it is to actually get to the cache's co-ordinates once you have determined them.

As a hypothetical extreme case.... Would a 'traditional' ammo can under a pile of sticks at the base of a lone tree... on the top of Mount Everest... be a 1 / 5 or a 5 / 5?

Groundspeak have determined that the use of 'specialist equipment' automatically means a rating of 5 but what for; Difficulty, Terrain or both?

What's the definition of 'specialist equipment'?... I guess, something you wouldn't normally take with you on a cache hunt. That could be something as extreme as full blown mountain climbing regalia, spiky shoes, ropes etc. or something as simple as a cross-head screwdriver. The climbing equipment would indicate a difficult journey to reach the cache so it should only affect the 'Terrain' rating. If the screwdriver is only required to open the cache box, then it implies that the cache would have already been reached so it would affect the 'Difficulty' not the 'Terrain'. The boundaries will get 'blurred' and interpretations differ. A cache that one person may find difficult may be easy for another. Terrain is also relative.... Is there any truly 5 star terrain in the UK when compared with the very rugged areas in the rest of the World? Should the Terrain rating of UK caches be rated relative to the toughest terrain the UK has to offer... and if so... what is the toughest?

Lots of 'blurring', lots of questions but no real answers (and a lot of waffle from yours truly... sorry :( )

Edited by Pharisee
Link to comment

I envisaged a cache at the top of an industrial chimney (requiring ladders and scaling equipment) but quite visible, and in an urban environment.

 

This rating system suggests it was D1/T5.

I agree with the last 2 posters.

 

Terrain is how physically hard it is to get to the area. Things that increase it might be a long hike, a steep hill, obstacles, tree climbing, abseiling, diving, caving, canoeing, etc.

 

Difficulty is how well it is hidden and how difficult it is to find the way to GZ. If I may explain the latter, there is a cache near me where it is very hard to find the right way in to the patch of ground, but once you know the way it is quite short and not hard going. For me that increases difficulty, not terrain. Good camo, a tricky puzzle or multi-stages bump it up.

 

Maybe think of terrain as a physical rating, difficulty as a mental rating.

 

Rgds, Andy

Link to comment

My personal view is that 'Difficulty' should be rated on how hard it is to find the actual box once you have reached the cache's location. This includes solving any puzzle that might be needed to determine the cache's co-ordinates.

The 'Terrain' should be rated on how difficult it is to actually get to the cache's co-ordinates once you have determined them.

 

 

Terrain is how physically hard it is to get to the area. Things that increase it might be a long hike, a steep hill, obstacles, tree climbing, abseiling, diving, caving, canoeing, etc.

 

Difficulty is how well it is hidden and how difficult it is to find the way to GZ. If I may explain the latter, there is a cache near me where it is very hard to find the right way in to the patch of ground, but once you know the way it is quite short and not hard going. For me that increases difficulty, not terrain. Good camo, a tricky puzzle or multi-stages bump it up.

 

Maybe think of terrain as a physical rating, difficulty as a mental rating.

 

Both the quotes above I find interesting.

Terrain seems more clearly defined by Groundspeak; Difficulty less so.

I have always thought an obvious ammo can on Mt. Everest would be 5/5, because the overall experience of getting up Everest is "difficult". And it's more than that it is physically difficult; it takes planning, equipment, etc.

 

I kind of like Andy's view about physical vs. mental. Climbing Everest is physically difficult; it is also difficult to arrange etc, so I would say 5/5 regardless of if it is a ammo can or a pebble camo'd nano in a field of pebbles. However - this means that there is no way to distinguish those 2 caches on Everest. So no interpretation is perfect.

 

I think some 5/5 caches have an extreme physical element; and the owner wants it to be 5/5; and the difficulty is harder to justify. But again... if it requires lots of planning, an overnight stay, etc; that could count as part of the difficulty.

Link to comment

The ratings are all up to the CO........and if the CO thinks the cache is a 5/5 based on his/her own capabilities to retrieve their own cache, they'll rate it as such.

 

It probably depends on your area.....the types of CO's you have in your area... the types of terrain available to you..... and the creativity of the CO's in your area.

 

Where I live....and the majority of the geocachers here.... a 5/5 is somewhat achievable with some help, tools or a little extra creative thought. There's a 5/5 that requires you to kayak to it.... when the water levels are normal-to-high, it is very hard to find. In the late summer when water levels are low, you can walk across the river....and the cache can be easily spotted. We found it in the late summer and walked to it (cache only 12" below water level) - is that considered cheating? Or is that considered creative thinking to a achieve a goal?

And to be honest.... walking across the river at lower levels is much SAFER than trying to find that cache in higher water levels (and the cache is 3-4' below the water level).

Edited by Lieblweb
Link to comment

I tend to agree with Ambrel on this matter. I think the difficulty rating should reflect how hard the cache is to find perhaps because it is a puzzle or very well hidden. I think there are quite a few puzzle caches around which deserve the 5 star rating but I have yet to come across a "well hidden" that could be rated 5 star. To achieve a terrain 5 star would require special skills (diving, climbing etc). I think the Everest ammo box would be a 1.5/5. Many cachers think that because the cache is on top of a Munro that it deserves a 5/5 rating but I do not agree with this thinking.

I am planning to do a cache called "Scotland's Hidden Treasure" (GC1VDNR) which is graded 5/5 but I expect to be more like 1.5/4.

I mentioned this to Signyred about Liathach's Micro (GC33PNE) and he reduced the rating from 5/5 to 2.5/4.5 which is more appropriate although perhaps a 2 for difficulty would be better. If you use the rating system provided by Groundspeak then it comes out at 1/4! (which is probably correct)

The only good thing about exaggerating the difficulty is that it puts the "number collectors" off trying the cache. I think what is needed in Geocaching are Invigilators to control cheating and misleading cache details.

Link to comment
I am planning to do a cache called "Scotland's Hidden Treasure" (GC1VDNR) which is graded 5/5 but I expect to be more like 1.5/4.
That's mine; I hope you enjoy it. It's a long climb without paths and depending on the weather, could be beyond a T5 into 'only the foolish' territory. When I set it I was under the impression Difficulty was 'over all' difficulty - how hard is it to get to and find. I appreciate this isn't the general consensus now, so it should probably only be a D2. If you use the clue, it falls to a D1.5. I would change the rating but I'm wary of messing up people's stats. Even if/though 5/5 isn't a truly accurate rating, it seems to be a cache people enjoy and remember as a tough challenge. Good luck with it and try to pick a nice day.
Link to comment
I am planning to do a cache called "Scotland's Hidden Treasure" (GC1VDNR) which is graded 5/5 but I expect to be more like 1.5/4.
That's mine; I hope you enjoy it. It's a long climb without paths and depending on the weather, could be beyond a T5 into 'only the foolish' territory. When I set it I was under the impression Difficulty was 'over all' difficulty - how hard is it to get to and find. I appreciate this isn't the general consensus now, so it should probably only be a D2. If you use the clue, it falls to a D1.5. I would change the rating but I'm wary of messing up people's stats. Even if/though 5/5 isn't a truly accurate rating, it seems to be a cache people enjoy and remember as a tough challenge. Good luck with it and try to pick a nice day.

I drove past this cache last week and the area brought back happy memories from my youth of climbing on Creag Meagaidh and staying in the bothy which I don't think exists any more. It is quite a long drive from my house but I made myself a promise to come back to do this cache as it is the sort of cache I really like. I don't agree with proctecting people's stats. Did any of them tell you that the cache rating was too high? Are they deluding themselves that they have done a 5/5? I hope this does not mean that they think they are capable of doing a real 5/5!

Link to comment
I drove past this cache last week and the area brought back happy memories from my youth of climbing on Creag Meagaidh and staying in the bothy which I don't think exists any more. It is quite a long drive from my house but I made myself a promise to come back to do this cache as it is the sort of cache I really like. I don't agree with proctecting people's stats. Did any of them tell you that the cache rating was too high? Are they deluding themselves that they have done a 5/5? I hope this does not mean that they think they are capable of doing a real 5/5!
I don't think anyone who's found it has complained yet. You're very welcome to make a D/T suggestion in your found (or other!) online log once you've reached the location, and returned alive... :) You're right, it's a wonderful area for climbing and walking. I suspect it's still snowy up there at the moment, thanks to our 'barmy' spring.

 

a84297a1-5beb-4ccd-ae0a-cf5d7fcfc400.jpg

Stevie M on his way up last year.

Edited by Geolympix
Link to comment

What's the definition of 'specialist equipment'?... I guess, something you wouldn't normally take with you on a cache hunt. That could be something as extreme as full blown mountain climbing regalia, spiky shoes, ropes etc. or something as simple as a cross-head screwdriver. The climbing equipment would indicate a difficult journey to reach the cache so it should only affect the 'Terrain' rating. If the screwdriver is only required to open the cache box, then it implies that the cache would have already been reached so it would affect the 'Difficulty' not the 'Terrain'.

I haven't come across a genuine 5/5 Traditional cache yet. The difficulty infers a hide that's so well-concealed that it would perhaps take several lengthy visits to locate. Assume Nothing #6 is an example: 9 finds and 91 DNFs in four years. To make it a 5/5 I'd have had to place it somewhere really inaccessible as well. Or where 'Specialist equipment' is required for access.

 

'Specialist equipment' is easy to define. It's equipment that requires specialised skills to use, i.e. some sort of training would be needed (as well as the equipment being the sort that you wouldn't normally carry when caching). So a screwdriver doesn't count, nor does a torch. If you have to lower a rope with a hook on the end to hook the cache, that wouldn't count either (even though you don't normally carry a rope). If you need to prussik up the rope, however, that would count. As would abseiling, scuba diving, or using a boat (unless it's just on an island on a boating lake!).

 

A more usual 5* difficulty cache is guarded by a really hard puzzle, of the type that gets solved very rarely and takes weeks or months of work to crack. These are fairly rare. This one is an example, although there are harder ones by the same team.

Link to comment

I'd like to nominate the UnderWorld 8 (Bonus) cache as (probably) one of the truest 5/5 caches around UK.

 

To get the co-ords, first you have to visit a total of 7 other UW underground locations scattered around Dartmoor. From each one you have to collect letters from the containers. Then you have to manipulate the letters to solve a really tricky Vigenere Square which will give you the co-ords for the cave entrance, then you have to crawl in there and get it.

 

There's a great feeling of satisfaction at the end of it all, you really feel you've earned your smiley.

 

MrsB

Link to comment

I'd like to nominate the UnderWorld 8 (Bonus) cache as (probably) one of the truest 5/5 caches around UK.

 

To get the co-ords, first you have to visit a total of 7 other UW underground locations scattered around Dartmoor. From each one you have to collect letters from the containers. Then you have to manipulate the letters to solve a really tricky Vigenere Square which will give you the co-ords for the cave entrance, then you have to crawl in there and get it.

 

There's a great feeling of satisfaction at the end of it all, you really feel you've earned your smiley.

 

MrsB

 

Hard work they may be MrsB - but none of them require specialist equipment or training, do they?

Link to comment

I'd like to nominate the UnderWorld 8 (Bonus) cache as (probably) one of the truest 5/5 caches around UK.

 

To get the co-ords, first you have to visit a total of 7 other UW underground locations scattered around Dartmoor. From each one you have to collect letters from the containers. Then you have to manipulate the letters to solve a really tricky Vigenere Square which will give you the co-ords for the cave entrance, then you have to crawl in there and get it.

 

There's a great feeling of satisfaction at the end of it all, you really feel you've earned your smiley.

 

MrsB

 

Hard work they may be MrsB - but none of them require specialist equipment or training, do they?

 

"Specialist training", no, but a couple of them I really wouldn't have wanted to do without hardhat/lamp and kneepads. Is that "specialist equipment"? :D

 

I would say that the D for the Final is correct if you take into account the amount of effort required to get together the numbers for the final location. The T for the Final might be better rated a 4, perhaps?

 

MrsB

Link to comment

I think the problem here is not really what constitutes a 5/5 cache but the fact that rating is not accurately applied by many cache owners. Should reviewers check the grading of caches? Should they be told when a grading is wrong? Do you think the grading facility is necessary or desirable.

Link to comment

I imagine the reviewers have their hands pretty full just reviewing new caches. Perhaps there needs to be a community rating system? You can add suggested co-ords to caches when you log them (best only done with Trads!) so why not give a personal D/T rating too? With caches which can go from easy to hard, depending on the weather, it might help people plan their caching trips.

Link to comment

I imagine the reviewers have their hands pretty full just reviewing new caches. Perhaps there needs to be a community rating system? You can add suggested co-ords to caches when you log them (best only done with Trads!) so why not give a personal D/T rating too? With caches which can go from easy to hard, depending on the weather, it might help people plan their caching trips.

 

I don't know what the reveiwer's remit includes but I would expect it is the full cache listing which must surely include the rating. You can certainly mention the rating in a log but not everyone reads the logs. The 5/5 rating is a bit special as it suggests that special equipment may be requred to do the cache or that finding the cache could take a considerable time after arriving at ground zero. I suppose this is why the rating facility was included in the cache description in the first place but if not rated correctly then it can cause confusion.

Link to comment

I don't think you can expect the reviewers to assess the D/T rating for a cache at publication time, after all much of the decision is subjective and often you need to be 'on the ground' to make a reasonable assessment.

 

Now that GC.com have a D/T rating page (similar to the Clayjar one), I think it would be a good idea to force the cache submission process to include that to at least set the initial D/T ratings which should (hopefully) lead to a bit more consistency.

 

There's nothing to stop a finder commenting on the D/T ratings when they log a find, I've done it on a cache that had only just been placed and the T rating was subsequently changed down from 4 to 3; although I'd be reluctant to do that on a long standing cache due to the possible side effect on peoples D/T grids.

Link to comment

I don't think you can expect the reviewers to assess the D/T rating for a cache at publication time, after all much of the decision is subjective and often you need to be 'on the ground' to make a reasonable assessment.

 

Now that GC.com have a D/T rating page (similar to the Clayjar one), I think it would be a good idea to force the cache submission process to include that to at least set the initial D/T ratings which should (hopefully) lead to a bit more consistency.

 

 

I think the reviewers could give special care to 5/5 cache ratings as these tend to be more serious caches and it is often obvious that the rating is not correct.

 

The idea of making completing a rating page before submission is a good one and would probably solve all the 5/5 problems.

Link to comment

GC3K9XQ T5 Tree-top Challenge is definitely a 5/5...more like 5 x 5/5s!!!!

 

 

This one looks like the typical incorrect listing. It looks as thought he difficulty is mainly due to tree climbing and not the difficulty of finding the caches.

 

Have not had the chance to look at the other listings yet.

Link to comment

In comparison to many other '5/5' caches in the UK, this is rated correctly.

I note that some people hide their statistics so it is not so easy to see what real experience they have of finding this type of cache.

We all learn from experience....Some have lots of experience and some have very little.

Also, I ask "How can a person comment on any particular cache" when they have not been there done that?

Link to comment

In comparison to many other '5/5' caches in the UK, this is rated correctly.

I note that some people hide their statistics so it is not so easy to see what real experience they have of finding this type of cache.

We all learn from experience....Some have lots of experience and some have very little.

Also, I ask "How can a person comment on any particular cache" when they have not been there done that?

 

I don't agree that it is rated correctly. It seems to me that this is similar to the Everest example which I would rate as a 2/5. I would agree that it is a difficult cache and I don't belittle your achievment in finding it however it would appear from you description that the caches were not difficult to find (in fact the hint says that No 5 can be seen from the ground!) That suggest to me that the only difficulty in this cache is the tree climbing. Am I missing something?

You could easily make this into a 5/5 by including a puzzle or by creating more imaginative hides (and probably less hints).

Link to comment

In comparison to many other caches in this country it's rated correctly.

 

A typical tree climbing 5/5 in the UK involves going up only one tree, but the cache I mentioned involves doing this 5 times, or even more if you do not get your rope in the correct place.

 

I understand your point about a puzzle making any cache even more difficult.

 

The difficulty we face is that there are so many caches that are over rated for difficulty and terrain.

We seem to have gone full circle with people placing what they're finding.

They find a cache up a slippery bank that is rated 5/5 so they go and place a cache in a similar type of location, and rate that as a 5/5 and so it goes on.

 

If you look at the caches in Germany, there are hardly any traditional caches that are rated as 5/5. The majority of their 5/5s are puzzles or long multi-caches.

A typical tree climbing cache in Germany is rated as about 2/5.

 

Anyway, I agree with what you say overall, but I'll repeat again that the caches I mentioned are 5/5 compared to most other caches in this country.

Link to comment

I have just completed a search of all the 5/5 caches in my area (Inverness) and of the 26 results only one, Multi-cache Tooey's Adventure No. 1 (GCYD9H) is what I would consider a 5/5 and even this one is fairly easy (although I was tricked at the first stage!!)

It seems that any caches placed on top of a Munro automatically become 5/5s!

I heve conncluded that the 5/5 grading is not being correctly applied but I have no idea of how to fix it. MartyBartfast's suggestion is a good one but I am not confident that Groundspeak would apply it especially since our German caching friends seem to be able to get the ratings correct.

Link to comment

All D/T ratings are subjective; those at the edges of the grid are more noticeable than others. There are lots of different COs and they will have different opinions. Barring the odd Liar cache, my presumption is that COs rate their caches in good faith.

 

When finding, the best I hope for is that the D/T is broadly in the right zone of the grid; with such a diversity of opinions, I think it is unrealistic to expect more than that. I haven't been disappointed: even if not strictly a 5/5 according to my own criteria, I've still had great fun at all the higher end caches I've found.

 

I hope the Powers That Be never decide that Reviewers should attempt to judge the D/T rating. Please let's think of fewer things Reviewers need to do, not more.

 

As others have suggested, if a Finder is worried about a rating (over or under), I'd suggest posting their D/T opinion in their log, to let the CO and other Finders know of their concerns. I wouldn't worry about the possible side effect on other Finders' D/T grids. Firstly, I'd expect a CO only to react (if at all) to a groundswell of such comments; secondly, perhaps that's just a Finder's risk of setting so much store by such a subjective measurement :)

Link to comment

Another thing to consider is the fact that we all play the same game but with differing self imposed rules and values.

 

A cache might be rated as 5 for difficulty, but then someone goes to an Event and they're told the solution to the difficult puzzle that they cannot solve.

Then, when they get to the coordinates and cannot find the cache, they PAF, and are told exactly how to locate the cache.

What would be the difficulty rating now???

Some people do this sort of thing regularly, and some people don't....We're all different.

 

Also, when reading logs of a "5/5" that requires paddling under a bridge, and you see the proud Mum or Dad that has just found the families "Wow...We're so chuffed.....Our very first 5/5 cache" and the kids are so happy, surely there's more good than bad in that situation.

 

Lots of 5/5s are over rated, but we can choose to find them or walk away.

Link to comment

So a quick review if the GC rating system at http://www.geocaching.com/hide/rate.aspx shows that of the 6 questions asked, 5 relate to terrain, and only one (the last one) really relates to difficulty, and its most extreme option is:

 


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

.

(my bold)

 

So once you've determined that it's a T5, then you're automatically on the way to "a serious physical challenge", so it's not unreasonable that COs would think that it therefore qualifies as a D5 if it's a bit of a struggle to get there.

Link to comment

2 more 5/5s this evening. 1 with a decorator's ladder (just because I'm carrying a bit too much weight for the pull up) and one just a normal tree climb.

Great fun but not 5/5. I would post a pic but that would be a spoiler. Hang on, if you can see the cache from the ground, what does that mean?

Link to comment

I have just completed a search of all the 5/5 caches in my area (Inverness) and of the 26 results only one, Multi-cache Tooey's Adventure No. 1 (GCYD9H) is what I would consider a 5/5 and even this one is fairly easy (although I was tricked at the first stage!!)

 

Odd that you felt 'tftc' was an adequate log for the only cache in the area that you consider to be a 'true' 5/5!! :huh:

 

 

Mark

Link to comment
Hang on, if you can see the cache from the ground, what does that mean?
If it's up a tree, it means you're quite tall.
How so?
Because... your head would be a long way from your feet, while still being attached..?

 

I'm obviously missing something here. Why do you have to be tall to see a cache container that is up a tree?

Link to comment
Hang on, if you can see the cache from the ground, what does that mean?
If it's up a tree, it means you're quite tall.
How so?
Because... your head would be a long way from your feet, while still being attached..?

 

I'm obviously missing something here. Why do you have to be tall to see a cache container that is up a tree?

Clearly that depends on factors such as how big it is; how well camoflaged it is; precisely where it is on the tree; and how far up it is.

 

I've done both caches that can be clearly seen from the ground and caches where you can't see it until you're well up the tree.

Link to comment

I was thinking cammo'd micro. A pink ammo can covered in lights, mirrors, tinsel and colourful little windmill spinners may be visible from the ground. Especially in winter if the tree's deciduous.

 

Back on topic, the real issue is difficulty and terrain are both subjective, can differ wildly from cacher to cacher and day to day. If finding (or hiding) 5/5's is an ego thing, it seems harmelss enough. Rather more worrying would be a 5/5 cache listed as a 2/1.5, making me feel both stupid for not working out the puzzle, and/or putting myself at risk by attempting to get to it, ill prepared and ill equipped to do so. For example, when setting 'risky' caches - such as my one above, or the one I left on Eigg (not so risky, but still) - I prefer to do so with company, and would suggest they're found in the same way.

Link to comment

I have just completed a search of all the 5/5 caches in my area (Inverness) and of the 26 results only one, Multi-cache Tooey's Adventure No. 1 (GCYD9H) is what I would consider a 5/5 and even this one is fairly easy (although I was tricked at the first stage!!)

 

Odd that you felt 'tftc' was an adequate log for the only cache in the area that you consider to be a 'true' 5/5!! :huh:

 

Mark

 

Although I still consider this to be a true 5/5 I was not impressed with the cache. I realize that people like to claim 5/5s and tell the story about how they did it. The trouble is that in so doing they give away the location of the cache and this was the case with this cache. Another reason for not saying too much was that the cache was not found at the correct location. I try not to read logs any more.

Link to comment

I was thinking cammo'd micro. A pink ammo can covered in lights, mirrors, tinsel and colourful little windmill spinners may be visible from the ground. Especially in winter if the tree's deciduous.

 

Back on topic, the real issue is difficulty and terrain are both subjective, can differ wildly from cacher to cacher and day to day. If finding (or hiding) 5/5's is an ego thing, it seems harmelss enough. Rather more worrying would be a 5/5 cache listed as a 2/1.5, making me feel both stupid for not working out the puzzle, and/or putting myself at risk by attempting to get to it, ill prepared and ill equipped to do so. For example, when setting 'risky' caches - such as my one above, or the one I left on Eigg (not so risky, but still) - I prefer to do so with company, and would suggest they're found in the same way.

 

Yup, cammo'd bisons. Hence why I questioned the difficulty element being a 5! If I can see them from the ground then how is that a 5 difficulty?

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...
×
×
  • Create New...