numbers

July 19, 2012

Throwing an idea into the pot to see what people think.

Have numbers been to the benefit or detrimental to this hobby?

Has the top catcher statistics been the cause of a large amount of angst, bitterness and so on. We're often hearing about people complaining of how groups or individuals log caches to boost their statistics. Did they all go to all caches etc.

Has the urgency to find another 1000 been the driving force for the perceived lowering of quality? Responsible for the rise in 35mm film pots every 500ft?

Is it true that quality x quantity equals a constant?

By the same reasoning. Is it better for events to get bigger and bigger? Does mega status mean better or not?

Smaller intimate events where you have time to meet everyone better, worse or just different from one attracting 500plus ?

I know nothing I say will change a thing but maybe someone needs to say that not every event needs to aim to attract everyone. Maybe limiting numbers sometimes would be a better way forward.

Anyway just my 5p worth. Discuss

6.1k · July 19, 2012

I'm not really bothered about my numbers, and I care even less about other peoples numbers so there's no angst about how many caches xxx has found as far as I'm concerned.

I think the perceived lowering of quality is more about the number of people playing the game, than the number of caches people are hunting for; having said that the tendency to place trails has also been blamed for a drop in quality but whether they're driven by the numbers or the style of walks is debatable.

As for events, no I don't think bigger is better. I went to the first two UK megas and while they provided a focal point for everyone getting together it was the smaller side events at both which were much more enjoyable, and I much prefer a small get together in a pub to a mega.

3k · July 19, 2012

Have numbers been to the benefit or detrimental to this hobby?

Definitely to the detriment. But have grown tired of spouting it on here.

As for events, no I don't think bigger is better.

Agreed. There's an event this weekend that's grown beyond all recognition - and not for the better (IMO)

We just have to accept that the majority of UK cachers want something different to the game we used to play.

They want big numbers. They want to go out for a day and come home to log a long series - regardless of where, how,or why they visited the caches.

And they want big events where they don't have to think about entertaining themselves. It's ironic that the small groups that used to attend camping events together still stay in the same groups now the events have grown....so what, exactly, is the appeal of an event getting so big that you don't stand a hope of - or even want to - meet more than a quarter of the attendees?

3.7k · July 19, 2012

Have numbers been to the benefit or detrimental to this hobby?

Has the top catcher statistics been the cause of a large amount of angst, bitterness and so on.

I think that a large number of people have enjoyed seeing their "found" stats progress, and it's a positive feature of the game so it's a benefit. A lot of fun is derived from (for instance) logging your 1000th, or finding out how many caches you've found in a particular county or country, and filling in various tick lists. It is supposed to be fun.

Clearly there is a down side (some people ignore superb caches in the interests of racking up a big score) but we shouldn't get too worried about that as it doesn't stop others enjoying caching. Even if there's a massive power trail in your area there's always some "old fashioned" caches nearby too.

As for the "top cacher" stats; I doubt that many outside the top twenty or so are the least bit bothered, and few are even going to be aware of such a thing.

1.1k · July 19, 2012

They want to go out for a day

I want to go out for a day, load up with food and water and go for eight hours or more until I get back to the car. I like the challenge of finding the best route along the way (which isn't always the route that the cache setter intended). I like to stop every 5 or 10 minutes to have the fun of hunting for a container. I like to get home totally exhausted and with legs aching, and with a feeling of accomplishment that I've done a particularly difficult or interesting cache, and that I've completed the route with no DNFs.

One of my best days out was 18 months ago, with the snow 18 inches deep, doing a ring of 50-odd caches, with no food, no water and nearly frozen feet.

The increase in the number of people setting rings and long series, has definitely been a plus for me (and, I think, for several other people who like the same sort of thing).

At the same time, there's still tons of caches to do that aren't like that, such as "Your Mission ..."

July 19, 2012

Throwing an idea into the pot to see what people think.

Have numbers been to the benefit or detrimental to this hobby?

Has the top catcher statistics been the cause of a large amount of angst, bitterness and so on. We're often hearing about people complaining of how groups or individuals log caches to boost their statistics. Did they all go to all caches etc.

Has the urgency to find another 1000 been the driving force for the perceived lowering of quality? Responsible for the rise in 35mm film pots every 500ft?

Is it true that quality x quantity equals a constant?

By the same reasoning. Is it better for events to get bigger and bigger? Does mega status mean better or not?

Smaller intimate events where you have time to meet everyone better, worse or just different from one attracting 500plus ?

I know nothing I say will change a thing but maybe someone needs to say that not every event needs to aim to attract everyone. Maybe limiting numbers sometimes would be a better way forward.

Anyway just my 5p worth. Discuss

Numbers have definately been to the benefit of geocaching. Great fun doing lots of number walks. Good for the health getting out in the fresh air with the kids. Quality of hides and places we are taken to have improved considerably as more people try and set more series.

I have found top cacher stats incredibly impressive. I am quite jealous of their ability to get out and explore so many new areas, plan new challenges etc. I find it quite inspirational to follow such a range of experiences. I wish I had the time.

I see no real reduction in quality. There are a few lame micros dropped in here and there but the actual variety of caches and quality of series feels better then ever at the moment. I have thoroughly enjoyed a whole group of new series in our area.

I have never attended an event so can't really comment.

The one point that does appear to be a constant is that there is always someone who is going to come on to the forums intimating that Geocaching is deteriorating and more and more peoples enjoyment is to the detriment of others. Maybe in its improved format it isn't the game for you anymore.

3.3k · July 19, 2012

Numbers have definately been to the benefit of geocaching.

I disagree.

I see no real reduction in quality. There are a few lame micros dropped in here and there but the actual variety of caches and quality of series feels better then ever at the moment.

With respect, if you'd been caching early last decade you'd know what the benchmark was with cache quality. A vast majority of all caches were hidden at locations that were chosen because it was worth going there even if there was no cache there.

The one point that does appear to be a constant is that there is always someone who is going to come on to the forums intimating that Geocaching is deteriorating and more and more peoples enjoyment is to the detriment of others. Maybe in its improved format it isn't the game for you anymore.

"Improved" in your opinion. "Different" in my opinion. It's not a case of people having to not play the game any more, it's just that some people will have to be more choosy in their caching to still enjoy themselves. Favourite points help in this respect, to a certain extent.

3.7k · July 19, 2012

I honestly don't believe that "numbers" are to blame for the rise in the type of cache that didn't exist in 2004.

Nevertheless, I quite like a lot of the new caches. Going back 8 years or so, such things as a fake rock were novel to the point of excitement. It raised eyebrows if you bothered to paint the box. Nowadays most caches seem to be hidden in ever more original ways, with unusual and creative descriptions to entertain you before you even leave home.

Dummy caches, extravagant camouflage, fake signs, mannequins, levers, pulleys, fishing line, combination locks, tubes to be filled with water, bird boxes, and so on are spread all over the place; often in pleasant spots that you never realised existed. Challenge caches, interesting series, circular walks, historical themes, collectible caches; almost all new(ish). If that's not improvement over the Good Old Days then I don't know what is.

Before all these "numbers" caches there were a few damp plastic containers under piles of twigs and that was about it. In nice spots (sometimes); but then it was easy in those days when permission wasn't needed and every nice spot in the area didn't have a cache in place already. And to cap it all, you can still go to all these nice locations and find a cache anyway. It's even easier to sort the wheat from the chaff with all the tools we're given.

July 19, 2012

Talk about a controversial topic :lol:

I have to admit to being on both sides of the argument, but mainly leaning towards the good old traditional caches in stunning and interesting locations. In my area, those are by no means dead - Wrighty, the best cache setter I know, hides wonderful big boxes in a location with a purpose. Find one of his caches, and you'll come home like you've found 100! For me, I always prefer quality over quantity! A good walk, in a nice spot, is all I need to have a perfect days caching.

Having said this, I also agree with what drsolly said. There's nothing better than coming home from a long days walk, after finding loads of caches, to sit down with a warm cup of tea under a blanket writing logs and re-living the adventure. I love that feeling, most extreme I've done is also 50 caches In a day in about 3 inches of snow in the remote Wiltshire downs , with no civilization to be seen - feet were frozen the entire time, got a couple of DNFs but it was fun - at the end of the day it's finding caches that we all enjoy, and the more you find, the more enjoyment you get in the day Do I prefer this to quality Wrighty caches with the good walk and no micros - no, I don't, but it still plays a part in my caching life - I am of very competitive nature, so I love improving my stats! The quality caches always come first though....

As for events - a small event can never, ever beat the buzz and excitement of a Mega - thousands of people all in one place at one time for a reason - now, I think that's pretty special. Where else do you see that? I find it a bit Shocking how keehotee has called this weekends event against all recognition - how is celebrating Geocaching bad? They have a lot for stats lovers, I do see that, but they do too have plenty for the traditional cache lovers - including an event at the location of the UKs oldest cache - is that a quality one or what?

If I had to pick between attending a mega or a smaller event? A mega, purely because they don't happen very often. Since joining in November 2010 and taking over the site in Febuary of this year, I have grown to know the inside story with small events. CacheWalker - see my footer for links to our forums - in 2007 eras before I began caching, a group of cachers joined to organise regular events with a pre-event group walk, in which all willing attendees tagged along chatting and socialising, picking up some new quality caches, before returning to a pub for the main event - I remember attending my first CacheWalker event back in 2011, they are like no other, completely the other side to the spectrum of a Mega event. If Megas took place every few months like CacheWalker events, then I would opt for the smaller one.

Like in everything, there is change. A new bunch of people have began playing the game, and have made it what it is. I don't agree with Mega trails - I only do long trails like said above in areas I know are lovely - especially these ridiculous highway trails in USA - I don't see how that is Geocaching in any way at all, but I have to accept that that's what people have made it. We can watch people get thousands and thousands of finds a day, a week, a year - but we've got to remember that everyone plays the game differently - I will always go for quality over quantity, only quality number trails, and only quality Megas.

As they say it's not about the numbers

Edited July 19, 2012 by Griff Grof

July 19, 2012

As they say it's not about the numbers

It's not *all* about the numbers

2.6k · July 20, 2012

There are many ways to answer this question. Personally - I do not care about anyone else's numbers. I do like to look at my numbers - not just the totals, but all the stats. I don't think the existence of the statistics is creating a decline in cache quality.

And different people enjoy different types of caches. They have varying physical abilities and time.

The driver for me is fun. I cache because I like it. So I try to choose caches which I will enjoy.

I like finding amazing, special caches. I'll happily spend a day (or multiple days) finding a single cache.

I also like nice circular walks in the countryside, where there are caches to find.

This may sound "corny" but it is true - I get a little pang of excitement with each find. So if I compare a 5 mile circular walk which has one cache vs. a 5 mile circular walk with 10 caches - all being equal - I will get more fun from the 10 caches. Now if that one cache is what I would call a "special, amazing cache", and the 10 caches are quality but ordinary caches - I probably get more fun from the one amazing cache, but I enjoy both types.

A ring with 10 amazing, special caches - well that would be something!

July 20, 2012

A ring with 10 amazing, special caches - well that would be something!

Find a Wrighty series and that is what you get

2.2k · July 20, 2012

I love the fact that when you begin a hot topic you will always get suggestions that you should leave the hobby lol

Personally I would love to be able to block out all caches in urban overlooked areas. I think I can honestly say that I've only ever seen a couple of caches in those locations that I'm glad I found.

All the varied caches described earlier with clever hides, tubes, intricate things to do...they've all been around since the very early years, all the caches at the start were far from clear boxes covered with twigs. They're still around now. There are talented people placing clever caches....but there are others who place a large number of caches that have been bulk sorted with the originality of a supermarket display shelf.

Have I had fun at big events? Yes. But mainly within a small group who were together. Mostly I have found that smaller, anything from 30-300 are much better. Having 200 plus people all together interacting as one is exceptional. Go this weekend to either large event or in a couple of weeks to the other mega. Will you honestly see 200 people interacting together as one ( and one of the talks doesn't really count) or will you see 60 small groups of people a few of who will mingle to another group?

Will it stop me attending events? yes, should it stop you? entirely your choice I make no judgement. (quick tell me that I should find a new hobby lol )

Edited July 20, 2012 by nobby.nobbs

3.7k · July 20, 2012

Personally I would love to be able to block out all caches in urban overlooked areas. I think I can honestly say that I've only ever seen a couple of caches in those locations that I'm glad I found.

All the varied caches described earlier with clever hides, tubes, intricate things to do...they've all been around since the very early years, all the caches at the start were far from clear boxes covered with twigs. They're still around now. There are talented people placing clever caches....but there are others who place a large number of caches that have been bulk sorted with the originality of a supermarket display shelf.

I just filtered out all the "Stealth Required" caches within about 50 miles of home and there are only 3200 of them (out of 13000 caches). I'd hazard that you'd be fine with the other 10000 or so for a few weeks.

I really didn't see many of those clever hides 8 years ago; hardly any, in fact. I'm sure that there were only a few thousand caches in the whole of the UK by the end of 2005 and you had to get through some serious driving to get to most of them so perhaps I didn't come across them. Most of the tricky hides I saw were in the USA.

July 21, 2012

This is one of those issues you've never going to settle. I personally enjoy little stas based challenges but equally I'll do any caches that seem to be worth the effort. On the event front I've been to some really awful small events which were clearly for a group of cachers who all knew each other and were just meeting each other not anyone else. Some others were so groupy that it was impossible to actually meet anyone Some of them really left me not wanting to attend anymore. Thankfully some of the other events I've been have been excellent. No large events so can't really describe it. Just a final note: If you log it you can't disapprove of it that much since you kept looking rather than walking on by.

July 23, 2012

Thanks for the varied opinions.

Some predictable some not.

Edited July 23, 2012 by endoheretic

July 23, 2012

Wow reading this thread I feel like im in an old folks home and they are moaning about rock music.

Geocaching has evolved the same way any game does. The longer you have been in it the more it will have evolved. You fell in love with it when it was 'pure' and what you remember. The same way my grandad still loves the long ball in football and double footed tackle. Fact is thought some people wont, or cant load up a 2 litre bittle, a gps, walking shoes and go blast some hills for 8 hours. There are alot of families and disabled people that geocache. And people like myself just enjoy taking 20 minutes out of our lives to grab a nearby one as the weekend schedule doesn't allow anymore.

Events are what you make of it. I have been to a few now. Of varying sizes and enjoyed them all. Theres nothign wrong with an event for 8 people or 800 so long as the organiser goes to the effort to make sure it runs smoothly. I.e, a decent pub with food or a town hall with stands and games.

I don't like how many 35mm film cannisters there are, by dammit I'm going to find them eventually on a busy day with a few minutes to spare. But if you don't like 35mm film cannisters then dont go for any caches under a 2.5 star difficulty. Those moaning about the difficulty and quality of caches. Well theres this system called favourites and youll find the better caches get points. So don't do any under 10 favourites and you will be fine.

July 23, 2012

I'm intrinsically on the lazier side. Although I like being out and about, sometimes my get-up-and-go goes off on its own without me and as such, I need something to motivate me. That's why I bought a GPS in the first place - for hillwalking, which I already did, but felt would be more fun with a toy to play with at the same time.

That was until I spotted the button saying "Geocaches" and the rest is history.

In the 3 and a half years since then, I've found just shy of 2,500 caches, which is kids' stuff compared with some of those on this site, but a heck of a lot more of getting up and going than I might have done without this crazy hobby. Whilst it's not strictly about the numbers, because if it were, I'd be up in the higher thousands by now, the fact that there is a running tally is in itself a motivator. I don't bother that much about who's around me, but I do gain a certain satisfaction in rounding up the numbers and reaching mini-milestones.

For instance, last year I had a major operation which I knew would put me out of action for months and so I was determined to reach 2,000 before I went into hospital; I noticed that I was doing quite well in the puzzles territory and after selling my soul to do lots of little cache and dashes, found a couple of wonderful puzzles as my 1,999th and 2,000th caches and 99th and 100th puzzles respectively.

I'm playing several other numbers games within this hobby. I'm trying to complete the Somerset Well-Rounded Cacher, for which I need to find all 81 D/T combinations and complete the 9 types of cache; I'm trying to complete various Challenge caches in which I have to find one cache every 5 miles up to 250 miles; I'm trying to fill in the grid of 365 (asked, but in reality 366) caches of every day in the calendar (luckily not all necessarily in the same year!), etc. These all involve different numbers and I'm plodding rather than racing my way through them all. It is merely a bit of fun, but it's my personal bit of fun, as it might be to others who choose to follow similar missions.

Some might say "why bother?", but we could say that about anything in life. Does it give me enjoyment? In the main. Yes, there are some series where one just goes through the motions, but for all the duller caches, there are plenty of fine hides which are all the more valued in contrast. For instance, I would recommend one particular series near me: those round Harlaw Reservoir (try putting "Balerno, UK" into your map) set by OnHisBike. Of course there are lots of other good series, but these are worth a special visit.

And on we go. So would I do away with numbers? No. The game is all about numbers, be it distance to a cache, co-ordinates, calculations and our own personal tally.

August 4, 2012

When I started caching almost 2 years ago i was advised not to look for micros, but that was all that there was in our town, it was an excellent learning curve. I have only done 280 in the time i have been caching but as i have my little B&B i really cannot get out and about in the summer as much as autumn/winter so numbers don't bother me, except when i am approaching a 'round' figure :grin: I love finding unusual caches, where a lot of thought has gone into them and also giving us a laugh trying to think ' how do we get that down from that tree ' etc.

6.2k · August 5, 2012

Go this weekend to either large event or in a couple of weeks to the other mega. Will you honestly see 200 people interacting together as one (and one of the talks doesn't really count) or will you see 60 small groups of people a few of who will mingle to another group?

Yes, and that too. It just takes a fun idea and some careful planning to make a Geocaching Mega Meet about Geocaching and Meeting

August 5, 2012

I'm not really bothered about my numbers, and I care even less about other peoples numbers so there's no angst about how many caches xxx has found as far as I'm concerned.

I think the perceived lowering of quality is more about the number of people playing the game, than the number of caches people are hunting for; having said that the tendency to place trails has also been blamed for a drop in quality but whether they're driven by the numbers or the style of walks is debatable.

As for events, no I don't think bigger is better. I went to the first two UK megas and while they provided a focal point for everyone getting together it was the smaller side events at both which were much more enjoyable, and I much prefer a small get together in a pub to a mega.

I am in full agreement - it is not the numbers but the quality of the cache that keeps me interested. In many cases some of the Series that have been set up with a 35mm film pot every 512 feet is often a "good walk spoilt".

August 5, 2012

I'm not really bothered about my numbers, and I care even less about other peoples numbers so there's no angst about how many caches xxx has found as far as I'm concerned.

I think the perceived lowering of quality is more about the number of people playing the game, than the number of caches people are hunting for; having said that the tendency to place trails has also been blamed for a drop in quality but whether they're driven by the numbers or the style of walks is debatable.

As for events, no I don't think bigger is better. I went to the first two UK megas and while they provided a focal point for everyone getting together it was the smaller side events at both which were much more enjoyable, and I much prefer a small get together in a pub to a mega.

I am in full agreement - it is not the numbers but the quality of the cache that keeps me interested. In many cases some of the Series that have been set up with a 35mm film pot every 512 feet is often a "good walk spoilt".

August 5, 2012

i went caching in swindon yesterday, ended up calling it a day after a few hours as i got bored finding 35mm in bushes with rubbish and needles. there was two huge trees which could fit a lunchbox half way up but instead in the ivy was a wet 35mm, at a bridge a 35mm when an ammo box or similar size could have snuggly hid there. on way home we decided to do a multi and a puzzle and actually enjoyed the multi the most as it was well thought out, a large ammo can and a huge logbook inside not some damp stinky mouldy bit of paper. i think we all should look at ways of making the experience better. do we really need to place a 35mm, can a ammo can or lunchbox fit there. what would you prefer to find.

August 6, 2012

Hello

I think as some have said this is a topic that often comes up and some people have some very hard views on the subject.

In my opinion there are a lot of caches out there and yes some are not exactly well thought out as a wet soggy log is often found. Having said that there have also been some 35mm canisters where the log was kept in good condition and was in a very nice location.

As to the numbers game, why not? If some people want to do this hobby based on numbers then why should they not be provided with that chance?

What people will find is that the tools are there on the site for them to view lots of caches and decide which caches they want to go for. Therefore if they are looking for a large sized cached where it takes a couple of hours to walk to in a stunning part of the countryside then they have that option.

We should not really moan about what we may class as a poor cache as it may be a jewel for someone else.

Initially when I started properly earlier this year I wanted to try and achieve 100+ finds before I moved away from Suffolk up to Cumbria. I achieved that and in doing so got taken to a lot of really nice places. There were magnetic micros on the back of signs, magnetic dog walking labels with a log hidden behind, 35mm pots and of course lunch boxes. Often the larger lunch boxes are damp where someone has not bought a thick solid tub. They also become britle and end up with holes in them.

Now that I have moved to Cumbria I still want to get my numbers up but not to the extent of trying to find 10 caches in a day. Yes it would be nice as often the fun is in finding them.

For me what I really like is to walk up some of the peaks in the Lake District and have a cache to find at the summit. Last week it took me over 2 hours to climb Grasmoor, up in the clouds, barely got to see many views from the top whilst on the summit but I had a cache to find. When I walked away across to Whiteless Edge / Pike the views were amazing. Only 1 cache for a very hard 5 hour walk that day.

In summary we need to make sure that we provide lots of caches of varying qualities and locations. Some people can not travel or walk very far so having that chance of enjoying this hobby is what we should provide. If people want to work as a group login and play the numbers game, let them. At the end of the day you know your number and how you got to that number. I'm proud of my small 118 (compared to some) as of today and I know that a small number of those caches some people would love to have had the oppertunity to find and see what I have seen.

Langy

August 6, 2012

I'm finding that location and quality of cache are more important than getting my numbers up. If I want to get the kids out the house and out for a walk, I'll do a series along a walk. These are ideal for the kids. When I am out on my own, I try to do caches that are in interesting places. its a massive bonus if the hide itself is a clever one (we did Bobs Mole Hill in Ramsey this weekend, it was one of such hides). That weekend walk was a nine hour day (incl driving to Huntingdon and back) where we attempted 11 and found 9 caches. The only reason numbers came in to it for us for a little healthy competition between ourselves whilst out. I don't tend to check others numbers, it just doesn't interest me.

As for the events. I suppose its like everything that changes, some will prefer the "good old days" and some will be looking to bring things more up to date and refresh them.

August 9, 2012

Personally I would love to be able to block out all caches in urban overlooked areas. I think I can honestly say that I've only ever seen a couple of caches in those locations that I'm glad I found.

There are certainly urban caches I walk away from as overlooked. There are others that make that part of the challenge. But I'm guilty of setting two very urban caches. One is just outside my house and what's really great is if you are honest to say what you are doing, you may get a little guideance from the muggle neighbour. My other is because I like the little train station and thought it deserved a side tracked.

August 9, 2012

Numbers are making this hobby different and I wasn't involved 8-10 years ago. However that difference is not all bad. It does mean you need to take more effort in deciding what you want to look for or attend.

And for me it's starting to be about the numbers due to some great challenge caches out there. Don't get me wrong, not volume but quality numbers :blink:

Look at RubyShoos challenges

:anibad: three caches with the tree climbing attribute in a day

:anibad: ten Multi caches in a day

:grin: 9 star rating variants of the D/T grid, i.e. a 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5 and 5 star rating in a day

:grin: three countries in a day

numbers

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation