It's all about the numbers!

19k · November 24, 2012

My Yuck, I actually like the high traffic areas for caches, makes me get quite imaginative with disguises to help me go unnoticed whilst searching.

Picking the right disguise is critical. The other day I disguised myself as Knowschad. Shop owner came up behind me and asked what I was doing. I answered "Meow". I don't think he bought it.

I saw that, Cat!

3.1k · November 24, 2012

Yep it is all about the numbers

We are retired and we cache all the time so the numbers start to add up.

Working friends call when they have a day off and we invade a nearby community and get numbers.

The weather looks good so we put the bikes on the car and drive a few hours to an area with lots of caches. We hike and bike there for a few days and the numbers add up.

We drive 800 miles to visit our daughter and family but it takes us a week to get there and the numbers add up.

We fly out west to vist our son, or so we tell him. He works all day while we hike and cache and the numbers add up.

We fill in the calendar but MA decides she would like 5 every day so the numbers add up

We try and beat our previous caching streak so we cache everyday and the numbers add up.

We try and beat last years total so the numbers add up.

We spend lots of hours solving puzzles in our area and in the areas we visit so the numbers add up.

We take one or two major hiking trips every year with friends and plan caching on the way and during the hikes and the numbers add up

We hide caches, usually in series so those numbers add up

We spend many hours creating puzzle caches. So those numbers add up.

We are obsessed and love caching so the numbers add up.

It all keeps us physically and mentally fit

Retirement has its perks, I see! :anicute:

2.6k · November 24, 2012

Around here the cachers with high numbers get those numbers because they love to cache and find the time to cache. None of them is competitive.

"Competive" implies competing with others. We use numbers to compete with our old numbers and to challenge ourselves. All the big number cachers that we know, seem to do the same.

PAul

I've been geocaching 1 1/2 years and one thing I have learnt, there are very many people looking at my numbers. How do I know this? Having found 3.5k caches in my short career I have been a topic of discussion at events even though I have met none of the people discussing me. Make no mistake your numbers are being watched.

Because you mentioned it, I looked.

You live in a cache dense area, very neat. I'm glad you've had the chance to do lots of caching.

But so does my competition and they still watch me. Also, geocachingly speaking I am handicapped, I live in North Vancouver, on an extreme end of the density and to get to the dense area I have to cross two bridges which generally are a nightmare.

This is roughly my area.

Based on the area you showed, you have over 8,000 caches within 50 miles of you. I have only 600. That means you have 13 times more caches to find than me. Multiply my finds by 13 in order to compensate and I have over 13,500 finds. That's means I'm better than you. Right? :rolleyes:

Bet you don't like those numbers.

Numbers mean nothing because from one cacher to the next they are like apples and oranges.

Edited November 24, 2012 by Totem Clan

November 24, 2012

Retirement has its perks, I see!

100% perks

2.6k · November 24, 2012

Retirement has its perks, I see!

100% perks

Tell me about!!

Retiring under the age of 50 is even better.

The disablities that let me do so kinda suck though. Ever worse when they kept me from caching for 2 months. :mad:

2.6k · November 24, 2012

Retirement has its perks, I see!

100% perks

Tell me about!!

Retiring under the age of 50 is even better.

The disablities that let me do so kinda suck though. Ever worse when they kept me from caching for 2 months.

Here's some numbers for you.

In my first 6 years of caching I found only 504 caches. 200 of those were in the first 3 months. I moved to North Dakota and had found EVERY cachs within 60 miles of my house in less than a month.

My wife retired just as I had I few years before. We moved here and I have found over 500 more caches in less than a year even though I was laid up for over 2 months due to some of my injuries. By laid I mean I could barley even walk to the bathroom much less go caching.

Location and the time to cache changes everything, which means one cacher's stats mean nothing compared to another's.

(If we had moved to OKC instead of way out in the country I might have found 1,000 or even 2,000 this year.)

3.6k · November 24, 2012

The number game is a rich man sport. I love caching at a slower speed. More enjoyable for me.

2.6k · November 24, 2012

The number game is a rich man sport. I love caching at a slower speed. More enjoyable for me.

+1

I caching at the speed of my enjoyment.

Today that meant 150 miles of nice backroads with my daughter. Some very nice veiws and few history lessons. Yet only 12 finds.

I had a great time and would have done it for 0 finds.

November 24, 2012

Well if we are talking numbers for retired people.

In Late September we were 500 behind last year

Then a trip to Prince Edward Island (PEI)

And then a few caching days with our caching friend Belladan

And then 4 days biking on the Confederation Trail on PEI with our friend globuf

Then a road trip to Ottawa to visit family (10 days) . We got Ma's brother in law into caching this trip

And we just back from Fredericton for some hiking and biking.

And continuing our streak

Now we are 500 caches above last year.

And in that same period we hid a series of 15 caches and also placed 8 puzzle caches.

Retirement is great

November 24, 2012

I caching at the speed of my enjoyment.

Today that meant 150 miles of nice backroads with my daughter. Some very nice veiws and few history lessons. Yet only 12 finds.

I had a great time and would have done it for 0 finds.

I can relate entirely. Happenned to us often. We find that the caching is the motivator to get us out and gets us to backroads and places in the woods that we wouldnt have been to otherwise. Our grandsons spend the summer with us and caching is certainly the tool we use to discover interesting places to show them.

2.3k · November 24, 2012

I realize that the people that visit this forum for the most part aren't the most competitive bunch but if it were not for the numbers would geocaching be around today?

Yes.

Maybe in an obscure kinda way, possibly, but as a legitimate hobby/sport, no way so as much as you may dislike the competitive side of geocaching you should be giving those of us that do enjoy it thanks for without us you'd not be here.

No.

Flame away.

Why?

10.2k · November 24, 2012

My Yuck, I actually like the high traffic areas for caches, makes me get quite imaginative with disguises to help me go unnoticed whilst searching.

Picking the right disguise is critical. The other day I disguised myself as Knowschad. Shop owner came up behind me and asked what I was doing. I answered "Meow". I don't think he bought it.

I like to disguise myself as a mean-looking 6' 200 Lb. 49 year old man with a military brush cut. Hasn't worked out for me so far though. I think the Knowschad disguise might be better.

Edited November 24, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

2.6k · November 24, 2012

My Yuck, I actually like the high traffic areas for caches, makes me get quite imaginative with disguises to help me go unnoticed whilst searching.

Picking the right disguise is critical. The other day I disguised myself as Knowschad. Shop owner came up behind me and asked what I was doing. I answered "Meow". I don't think he bought it.

I like to disguise myself as a mean-looking 6' 200 Lb. 49 year old man with a military brush cut. Hasn't worked out for me so far though. I think the Knowschad disguise might be better.

LOL

Yeah, my disguise is a breaded 200 lb man with a pony tail and Special Forces tatoos. It's worked great so far. Except at playgrounds where I have to add the standard issue pre-teen child to the kit. Too bad the ones I have are getting to old to work that way anymore.

1.1k · November 24, 2012

Retirement has its perks, I see!

100% perks

Alas, coming out of retirement to return to work (don't ask) took away some nice perks. But I do get a lot of people call me "Sir", lol.

November 24, 2012

I like *my* numbers, but I don't compare them with other cacher's numbers.

I really don't care if the person who I'm caching with has 10, 100, 1000, or 10,000.

I don't compete with anyone while geocaching.

So, as far as I'm concerned, My numbers don't need to be on display for the public so long as I can see them. I have statistics on my profile so I can see them.

2.6k · November 24, 2012

I like *my* numbers, but I don't compare them with other cacher's numbers.

I really don't care if the person who I'm caching with has 10, 100, 1000, or 10,000.

I don't compete with anyone while geocaching.

So, as far as I'm concerned, My numbers don't need to be on display for the public so long as I can see them. I have statistics on my profile so I can see them.

As long as could see mine and my Friends I would be happy. I like keeping up with my friends numbers just to congratulate them when they reach a milestone of any kind. As for all the other cachers' numbers, I couldn't care less.

10.2k · November 24, 2012

My Yuck, I actually like the high traffic areas for caches, makes me get quite imaginative with disguises to help me go unnoticed whilst searching.

Picking the right disguise is critical. The other day I disguised myself as Knowschad. Shop owner came up behind me and asked what I was doing. I answered "Meow". I don't think he bought it.

I like to disguise myself as a mean-looking 6' 200 Lb. 49 year old man with a military brush cut. Hasn't worked out for me so far though. I think the Knowschad disguise might be better.

LOL

Yeah, my disguise is a breaded 200 lb man with a pony tail and Special Forces tatoos. It's worked great so far. Except at playgrounds where I have to add the standard issue pre-teen child to the kit. Too bad the ones I have are getting to old to work that way anymore.

I am 100% ink-free! Amazing for 22 years in the Army, although all Reserve Component. But I've been told I'm mean-looking since my teens, and my wife of 25+ years will agree, as well as both my Children's friends. I've been questioned by law enforcement at least 5 times while Geocaching, and even detained for 15 minutes once. Stealth is not one of my finer points. That would be off-topic, wouldn't it? Sorry. I still love my own Stats for the way I like to cache, the built-in ones on Geocaching.com, and the program CacheStats, which I have to be about the only person on the planet who still uses it.

3.8k · November 26, 2012

I am not obsessive about numbers or highly competitive with my geo-friends but if I were being honest with myself, I don't think geocaching would have had the lasting effect that it did without the numbers. I could have easily peeled off into other activities such as strictly biking, paddling, spelunking, etc. The numbers DO help keep me interested.

3.8k · November 26, 2012

Yeah, my disguise is a breaded 200 lb man with a pony tail and Special Forces tatoos.

Are you breaded with corn meal or Italian bread crumbs?

November 26, 2012

My numbers have a little meaning to me but I doubt they do to anybody else.

Other cacher's numbers don't hold much interest to me.

(edited for spelling)

Edited November 26, 2012 by the3gmen

2.6k · November 26, 2012

I realize that the people that visit this forum for the most part aren't the most competitive bunch but if it were not for the numbers would geocaching be around today?

Maybe in an obscure kinda way, possibly, but as a legitimate hobby/sport, no way so as much as you may dislike the competitive side of geocaching you should be giving those of us that do enjoy it thanks for without us you'd not be here.

Flame away.

Geocaching has absolutely NOTHING to do with the numbers and if you had as many finds as ME you would KNOW that!

:laughing:

</sarcasm>

2.6k · November 26, 2012

Yeah, my disguise is a breaded 200 lb man with a pony tail and Special Forces tatoos.

Are you breaded with corn meal or Italian bread crumbs?

LOL oops. It least I had the right letters. :laughing:

2.6k · November 26, 2012

The logging and the history are important to me. And with that comes numbers and stats. And I am someone who likes numbers and stats.

If there was no logging - so no history, and no numbers.. I would enjoy caching less. I especially like looking at different places I've been; e.g. how many countries; how many US states etc as well as how many squares of the D/T grid... not to compete but because I find that fun. Colouring in a new country on the map or a new D/T square gives me pleasure.

I don't care at all about competing with anyone about any numbers.

I do find it useful to be able to see the numbers of others only as an indication to understand them. E.g. if I get a DNF on a cache of mine from someone with 5 finds, I might email them and offer a hint, as well as to introduce myself. Of course this isn't perfect; someone could have 1000 finds and all they did was a single powertrail in Nevada... But I wouldn't care if numbers were more hidden.

2.7k · November 27, 2012

Figures lie and liars figure. - Will Rogers

More than numbers found, I look to time in the game. Given a few weeks and proper funding, a new cacher could hit selected power trails and gather more numbers than the OP has in his 1-1/2 years in the game.

Would that make the newbie a better cacher than the OP? By his way of measuring, YES. By my way of measuring, not so.

9.3k · November 27, 2012

-"Numbers don't matter/geocaching isn't a competition"

-"I'm all about the numbers!"

-"Anyone who is into the numbers is hurting the game"

-"Anyone who is into the numbers is an idiot"

-"Anyone who isn't into the numbers is an idiot"

-"Numbers don't have anything to do with the spirit of geocaching"

You forgot the silliest bit of hyperbole ever to grace the forums:

Show me someone that says it's not about the numbers and I'll show you someone that can't count.

Being somewhat of a math nerd, I can assure you, (the collective you), that I actually do know how to count.

Yet, contrary to that bit of silliness, I will say, for me, it's not about the numbers.

Never has been. Never will be.

November 27, 2012

Think of caching as reading. Some people like reading the classics, some like comic books. Some read on weekends, some read on the train. Some people read lots of books while others read occasionally when they have time. Some people write books, others write short stories. All of them enjoy what they are doing and get something different from their reading. Despite all of the different reasons people read, none of them are wrong (with the possible exception of 50 shades). None of them harm each other and all have free choice about what books they read and how fast they read them.

I might add though that one set of numbers has started to effect my chaching, the temperature, nano logs in the cold are difficult to re-roll LOL. Not going to stop me though.

November 27, 2012

Of course it's about the numbers! My numbers!

Trying to average a cache a day. Started more slowly so it's taking some work - especially now that it's winter and caching after work is not happening. So, just have to make up for it on the weekends...

3.3k · November 27, 2012

-"Numbers don't matter/geocaching isn't a competition"

-"I'm all about the numbers!"

-"Anyone who is into the numbers is hurting the game"

-"Anyone who is into the numbers is an idiot"

-"Anyone who isn't into the numbers is an idiot"

-"Numbers don't have anything to do with the spirit of geocaching"

You forgot the silliest bit of hyperbole ever to grace the forums:

Show me someone that says it's not about the numbers and I'll show you someone that can't count.

Being somewhat of a math nerd, I can assure you, (the collective you), that I actually do know how to count.

Yet, contrary to that bit of silliness, I will say, for me, it's not about the numbers.

Never has been. Never will be.

I have to question your math nerdiness. How can a self proclaimed math nerd not love analyzing numbers, of any kind. I am always analyzing some numbers. If not my cache stats, it's the standard deviation of church members arrival time or something else. It is alway something.

2.6k · November 27, 2012

I have to question your math nerdiness. How can a self proclaimed math nerd not love analyzing numbers, of any kind. I am always analyzing some numbers. If not my cache stats, it's the standard deviation of church members arrival time or something else. It is alway something.

If you are a math nerd then you know that is no way you can use caching numbers to obtain in useful information to compare cachers. There is no standard basis because the numbers have been complied using widely varied and sometimes openly flawed methods.

Statisics for each cacher can be rationally compared only with own numbers. Beyond that the system is so flawed as to be useless.

3.3k · November 27, 2012

I have to question your math nerdiness. How can a self proclaimed math nerd not love analyzing numbers, of any kind. I am always analyzing some numbers. If not my cache stats, it's the standard deviation of church members arrival time or something else. It is alway something.

If you are a math nerd then you know that is no way you can use caching numbers to obtain in useful information to compare cachers. There is no standard basis because the numbers have been complied using widely varied and sometimes openly flawed methods.

Statisics for each cacher can be rationally compared only with own numbers. Beyond that the system is so flawed as to be useless.

Yes, but that is all part of the fun. Identifying source of error can be just as fun as figuring out some bizzare terrain rating stat. (eg. of my mountain caches, my terrain rating average is 4.4)

7.5k · November 27, 2012

Of course it's about the numbers! My numbers!

I think this captures it. Yeah, a few people compete, I guess. But most people could care less about comparing anyone else's numbers to theirs. I'd say that most people, maybe almost all, like to look at and analyze their numbers. A lot probably like to analyze other people's numbers, too. But that doesn't prove that such analyses are the main reason most people cache. I think most people are like me: my pleasure in looking at the numbers is an effect of my enjoyment of caching, it's not the cause.

2.6k · November 27, 2012

I have to question your math nerdiness. How can a self proclaimed math nerd not love analyzing numbers, of any kind. I am always analyzing some numbers. If not my cache stats, it's the standard deviation of church members arrival time or something else. It is alway something.

If you are a math nerd then you know that is no way you can use caching numbers to obtain in useful information to compare cachers. There is no standard basis because the numbers have been complied using widely varied and sometimes openly flawed methods.

Statisics for each cacher can be rationally compared only with own numbers. Beyond that the system is so flawed as to be useless.

Yes, but that is all part of the fun. Identifying source of error can be just as fun as figuring out some bizzare terrain rating stat. (eg. of my mountain caches, my terrain rating average is 4.4)

Exactly! YOUR average. Even if all I get are 1/1 P&Gs my elevation average will be higher than someone caching near the coast even if all there caches are high terrain caches. There is no even basis for comparing stats between cachers.

19k · November 27, 2012

Yeah, my disguise is a breaded 200 lb man with a pony tail

I'll bet that breading makes you nice and crunchy! :lol:

[Edited to add: I guess I was a little late with the humor :huh: ]

Edited November 27, 2012 by knowschad

2.8k · November 27, 2012

Of course it's about the numbers! My numbers!

I think this captures it. Yeah, a few people compete, I guess. But most people could care less about comparing anyone else's numbers to theirs. I'd say that most people, maybe almost all, like to look at and analyze their numbers. A lot probably like to analyze other people's numbers, too. But that doesn't prove that such analyses are the main reason most people cache. I think most people are like me: my pleasure in looking at the numbers is an effect of my enjoyment of caching, it's not the cause.

I disagree, maybe few that visit this forum but this forum does not represent a cross section of the caching community. Well over half the cachers I know do take interest in their numbers and want to pass the next person on cacherstats list. Also have a look at how many have gsak stats loaded on their profile.

3.1k · November 27, 2012

Of course it's about the numbers! My numbers!

I think this captures it. Yeah, a few people compete, I guess. But most people could care less about comparing anyone else's numbers to theirs. I'd say that most people, maybe almost all, like to look at and analyze their numbers. A lot probably like to analyze other people's numbers, too. But that doesn't prove that such analyses are the main reason most people cache. I think most people are like me: my pleasure in looking at the numbers is an effect of my enjoyment of caching, it's not the cause.

I disagree, maybe few that visit this forum but this forum does not represent a cross section of the caching community. Well over half the cachers I know do take interest in their numbers and want to pass the next person on cacherstats list. Also have a look at how many have gsak stats loaded on their profile.

What is a "cacherstats list"? :blink: Never heard of it. Also, I don't use GSAK. When I did have stats on my profile, it was the ones from Groundspeak that could be displayed on my profile tab. Now, I took them off because they were just for me.

Sounds like you surround yourself with people who are competitive, and who want to beat someone at this game. Your informal "survey" of your cachers you know is hardly more convincing than the feedback we've seen in this thread.

Also, even with a formal logitudinal survey of all geocaching.com users, that information on a subjective issue such as asking, "Is it all about the numbers?" can hardly be used to arm your opinion on the matter. As geocaching.com does not recognize the smaller sub-games as official geocaching activities, it doesn't matter what people think. It's all about each individual, and we can all have our opinions. Is it all about the numbers? Sure, for me, it's all about my own numbers--and even then, I know that in my 10 years of geocaching, I'm not at 11k finds like some others. I'm ok with that. What I'm not ok with is when someone tells me that I'm getting "beat" by other cachers when I'm not even playing their sub-game.

2.8k · November 27, 2012

Of course it's about the numbers! My numbers!

I think this captures it. Yeah, a few people compete, I guess. But most people could care less about comparing anyone else's numbers to theirs. I'd say that most people, maybe almost all, like to look at and analyze their numbers. A lot probably like to analyze other people's numbers, too. But that doesn't prove that such analyses are the main reason most people cache. I think most people are like me: my pleasure in looking at the numbers is an effect of my enjoyment of caching, it's not the cause.

I disagree, maybe few that visit this forum but this forum does not represent a cross section of the caching community. Well over half the cachers I know do take interest in their numbers and want to pass the next person on cacherstats list. Also have a look at how many have gsak stats loaded on their profile.

What is a "cacherstats list"? Never heard of it. Also, I don't use GSAK. When I did have stats on my profile, it was the ones from Groundspeak that could be displayed on my profile tab. Now, I took them off because they were just for me.

Sounds like you surround yourself with people who are competitive, and who want to beat someone at this game. Your informal "survey" of your cachers you know is hardly more convincing than the feedback we've seen in this thread.

Also, even with a formal logitudinal survey of all geocaching.com users, that information on a subjective issue such as asking, "Is it all about the numbers?" can hardly be used to arm your opinion on the matter. As geocaching.com does not recognize the smaller sub-games as official geocaching activities, it doesn't matter what people think. It's all about each individual, and we can all have our opinions. Is it all about the numbers? Sure, for me, it's all about my own numbers--and even then, I know that in my 10 years of geocaching, I'm not at 11k finds like some others. I'm ok with that. What I'm not ok with is when someone tells me that I'm getting "beat" by other cachers when I'm not even playing their sub-game.

I don't use facebook, does that mean no one does? I'd say 1/2 the cachers over 200 finds have gsak generated stats on there profile page and cacherstats.com gets several thousand visitors a day.

There are different ways of competing, you can compete with your friends, you can compete with members of your local club, your province or state, your country or the world.

As humans we are born to be competitive and raised that way as well, take that away and maybe natural selection will make sure we join the extinct list.

7.5k · November 27, 2012

I disagree, maybe few that visit this forum but this forum does not represent a cross section of the caching community. Well over half the cachers I know do take interest in their numbers and want to pass the next person on cacherstats list.

I'm afraid I'd guess that it's the list of people you know that is the more biased sample. I've never run into a single cacher that seeks caches only to pass someone else on some caching volume list. About the most I can even imagine from the cachers I know is being proud of their position in the list because it means they're getting a lot of caches, not because they've gotten more caches than someone else.

Also have a look at how many have gsak stats loaded on their profile.

Again, I don't deny people like to analyze their numbers. I'm just denying that many of them are posting their stats on their profile specifically to crow about them. And as supporting evidence, I point out that many cachers post statistics that are nothing to crow about. That must baffle you, but it makes perfect sense to me.

7.5k · November 27, 2012

As humans we are born to be competitive and raised that way as well, take that away and maybe natural selection will make sure we join the extinct list.

Maybe this is our confusion. Sure, people compete all the time. That's different than saying people play only to compete.

November 27, 2012

Numbers really mean something; we used to discuss cachers who have 5,000 finds or more and I was amazed recently reading a log from a cacher who had >50,000 finds. This is very impressive if you take into account that I live in a country where 200 finds mean a huge success. So, we cannot compare numbers (it would be useless) but I agree with those who said that "people compete all the time". If geocaching had no such competition people would invent smth else to compete, really. From our local experience we know that this could be "elections" to some kind of a "geocaching board", or getting access to some private forum, or "geocaching nominations", diplomas, etc. Not all these examples are really positive and some may lead to conflicts and influence the game badly. So, numbers are not the worst variant, and when someone says "I found N geocaches last month" and "it was pretty easy", I'm not upset that I managed to find 1/5 of this number only.

Edited November 27, 2012 by -CJ-

19k · November 27, 2012

Numbers really mean something; we used to discuss cachers who have 5,000 finds or more and I was amazed recently reading a log from a cacher who had >50,000 finds.

The problem with taking these numbers seriously, though, is that when you were amazed by cachers with 5,000 finds, it probably took as much effort as it takes to find 15,000 finds today. Caches were fewer and farther apart. Today, a person can get a brand new account, hop in a van with some experienced cachers, drive to Nevada or any of a number of other areas, and log 1,000 finds on their very first weekend!

I was giving this numbers thing a little thought last night, and I realize that curiosity, not competition, is my motivating factor. I want to see what a cache will show me, either in where it is hidden, or how it is hidden. I have, in the past, been motivated by competition, but for me, that wore off eventually, when I realized the pace that I would have to keep up continually in order to keep a find count that really mattered to those that care about such things.

5k · November 27, 2012

Of course it's about the numbers! My numbers!

I think this captures it. Yeah, a few people compete, I guess. But most people could care less about comparing anyone else's numbers to theirs. I'd say that most people, maybe almost all, like to look at and analyze their numbers. A lot probably like to analyze other people's numbers, too. But that doesn't prove that such analyses are the main reason most people cache. I think most people are like me: my pleasure in looking at the numbers is an effect of my enjoyment of caching, it's not the cause.

I disagree, maybe few that visit this forum but this forum does not represent a cross section of the caching community. Well over half the cachers I know do take interest in their numbers and want to pass the next person on cacherstats list. Also have a look at how many have gsak stats loaded on their profile.

Oh look, I'm #292 in my state. Cool. The last time I looked was when someone brought it up on the forum. I'd forget that it's even there, otherwise, and I could care less who #291 is. Oh, and I have my GSAK stats on my page. How does that work in your equation. You really need to stop trying to pigeon hole everyone.

19k · November 27, 2012

Of course it's about the numbers! My numbers!

I think this captures it. Yeah, a few people compete, I guess. But most people could care less about comparing anyone else's numbers to theirs. I'd say that most people, maybe almost all, like to look at and analyze their numbers. A lot probably like to analyze other people's numbers, too. But that doesn't prove that such analyses are the main reason most people cache. I think most people are like me: my pleasure in looking at the numbers is an effect of my enjoyment of caching, it's not the cause.

I disagree, maybe few that visit this forum but this forum does not represent a cross section of the caching community. Well over half the cachers I know do take interest in their numbers and want to pass the next person on cacherstats list. Also have a look at how many have gsak stats loaded on their profile.

Oh look, I'm #292 in my state. Cool. The last time I looked was when someone brought it up on the forum. I'd forget that it's even there, otherwise, and I could care less who #291 is. Oh, and I have my GSAK stats on my page. How does that work in your equation. You really need to stop trying to pigeon hole everyone.

I'm #43 in my state even though I have slowed to a crawl in the past year or so. At one time I was somewhere around #13, I believe. I cached for a while with the guy that is currently #3 in the world listings. So much for the stereotyping of forum regulars.

2.8k · November 27, 2012

Mm, I see a lot of numbers being thrown about.

3.3k · November 27, 2012

Mm, I see a lot of numbers being thrown about.

I am #403 out of 1088 in my province. That puts me in the top 37%

108751 out of 205000 or top 53%

Looks like my province has an overall low find count. No huge power trails here my explain that?

The % of course are of caches with more than 200 finds.

2.8k · November 27, 2012

I went out last week with a goal to pick up 100+ caches to put me in the top 100 for B.C.

November 27, 2012

For me it was all about the numbers til I hit 10k and now I don't even care anymore. I just thought it was kinda cool to see the 5 digit find counts when I first started. :laughing: So I always said I would make it to 10k before i quit.

2.8k · November 27, 2012

For me it was all about the numbers til I hit 10k and now I don't even care anymore. I just thought it was kinda cool to see the 5 digit find counts when I first started. So I always said I would make it to 10k before i quit.

20k is the new 10k.

Edited November 27, 2012 by Roman!

November 28, 2012

For me it was all about the numbers til I hit 10k and now I don't even care anymore. I just thought it was kinda cool to see the 5 digit find counts when I first started. So I always said I would make it to 10k before i quit.

20k is the new 10k.

Thats funny :laughing: . I play a different game thats really about the numbers.

2.8k · November 28, 2012

As humans we are born to be competitive and raised that way as well, take that away and maybe natural selection will make sure we join the extinct list.

Maybe this is our confusion. Sure, people compete all the time. That's different than saying people play only to compete.

I'm not saying people only play to compete.

Groundspeak costs a lot of money to run and they make that money from their member base. If you took away stats and the ability for cachers to compete amongst themselves then I feel enough of the user base would either stop or reduce their financial support through not caching, not being premium members, etc. that the company could not function to the capacity it does today.

Thus as my original post said you can thank the people that. Are in it for the numbers for the fact the company is as strong as it is.

3.1k · November 28, 2012

As humans we are born to be competitive and raised that way as well, take that away and maybe natural selection will make sure we join the extinct list.

Maybe this is our confusion. Sure, people compete all the time. That's different than saying people play only to compete.

I'm not saying people only play to compete.

Groundspeak costs a lot of money to run and they make that money from their member base. If you took away stats and the ability for cachers to compete amongst themselves then I feel enough of the user base would either stop or reduce their financial support through not caching, not being premium members, etc. that the company could not function to the capacity it does today.

Thus as my original post said you can thank the people that. Are in it for the numbers for the fact the company is as strong as it is.

You've kind of been all over the map on this point. In your original post, you implied that if it wasn't for the competitive geocachers, geocaching wouldn't exist as a legitimate hobby/sport.

The next day, you made this claim:

But if Groundspeak did away with visible stats and there was no way to see others numbers would the company exist? Absolutely not.

That's quite different than saying geocaching would exist but just not at the capacity it does today.

It's all about the 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

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