Jump to content

Favorite Points %


DrAwKwArD
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

I've been using a two step process to identify quality caches that I want to search for. Since I cache in order to be outdoors and either hiking or kayaking in an interesting area, as each new cache is published I look at the placement and based solely on the distance from parking classify it as either a hide (on or near pavement) or a cache (more than one quarter mile from parking. Most new hides are within 100 feet of pavement, and 75% of the new placements qualify as hides, so this acts as a reliable filter to identify caches that require some physical effort to reach. For established caches, I use a combination of fav. pts. (at least 5) and fav. pt. percentage (25% or higher). About 5% of placements pass this filter and they are typically well worth hiking or paddling to. Very few are roadside micros. It does not seem like this type of filtering is of any interest to the majority of catchers (indeed folks really do object to having their roadside micro identified as a "hide") but it works for me. A "FP%" filter would be a welcome addition to the search function.

edexter

Link to comment

Here's what project-gc tells me about my hides:

 

Owned: 27, 3 now archived (11.11%)

Total finds of my caches: 908 finds in 397 total days, 0.97/day, 6.73/week, 29.29/month

Total finders of my caches: 405

Total finds I've made: 2442

Caching karma: 0.37 (908/2442)

Hide with the most finds: 125, St. Helen's Wharf, GC4GY0K

Hide with the most favorite points: 15, Tie A Yellow Ribbon, GC53WTE

Hide found most frequently: Every 4.29 days, William and Huw, GC57HTX

Total favorite points received: 124 (18.3%)

 

Pleased to have a % above 10 for that last stat. I think it has been above 20, but my most found and most frequently found are both pretty run-of-the-mill so they bring that number down.

Link to comment

Here and altogether more impressive are the hide stats of JJEF, the local field puzzle specialist (see quirky caches Facebook page):

Owned: 135, 72 now archived (53.33%)

Total finds of my caches: 11350 finds in 1070 total days, 8.27/day, 57.61/week, 246.74/month

Total finders of my caches: 1013

Hide with the most finds: 205, Hogoak Lane #3, GC3E864

Hide with the most favorite points: 65, Shurlock Stroll #1, GC43H2K

Hide found most frequently: Every 0.50 days, BDB No.2, GC5FW22

Total favorite points received: 2202 (24.1%)

Link to comment

Here's what project-gc tells me about my hides:

 

Owned: 41, 4 now archived (9.76%)

Total finds of my caches: 4688 finds in 1640 total days, 1.22/day, 8.51/week, 36.91/month

Total finders of my caches: 1938

Total finds I've made: 431

Caching karma: 10.88 (4688/431)

Hide with the most finds: 709, Welcome to Marquette 1974, GCQQ7Y

Hide with the most favorite points: 43, April Tools Cache, GC3FGF1

Hide found most frequently: Every 5.21 days, Welcome to Marquette 1974, GCQQ7Y

Total favorite points received: 439 (15%)

 

The 15% favorite points would have been considerably higher, but 22 of my 41 hides were in place before the favorite points system had been established in Dec 2010. (My first cache hides date back to April 2005.)

Link to comment

Not sure how admirable my hide stats are..

 

Owned caches statistics

Owned: 478, 302 now archived (63.18%)

Total finds of my caches: 25737 finds in 2531 total days, 6.68/day, 46.71/week, 202.65/month

Total finders of my caches: 2339

Total finds I've made: 10618

Caching karma: 2.42 (25737/10618)

Hide with the most finds: 463, St. Anthony Heritage Trail, GCP1ZA

Hide with the most favorite points: 71, Fire and Ice, GC4TXB2

Hide found most frequently: Every 0.05 days, Spooky Skeletons Screech Strangely Scaring Spiders, GC660J8

Total favorite points received: 1773 (8.5%)

Log length, words: Average: 41, Longest: GC47072 727

Link to comment

I really appreciate getting good logs and earning a favorite point on my hides. I don't have huge numbers but I think that those who do seek my hides tend to enjoy them. Or at least they create memorable experiences.

 

Owned:60, 7 now archived (11.67%)Total finds of my caches:451 finds in 211 total days, 0.28/day, 1.95/week, 8.51/monthTotal finders of my caches:191Total finds I've made:2899Caching karma:0.16 (451/2899)Hide with the most finds:36, Dinner and a Movie (2015 GIFF Viewing Event), GC64299Hide with the most favorite points:16, Bear Necessities, GC33K9PHide found most frequently:Every 2.50 days, Lost Quadcopter, GC5YP2NTotal favorite points received:179 (41.7%)Log length, words:Average: 104, Longest: GC4GDG0 735

Link to comment

I did find this link

http://project-gc.co...stics/TopFavPct

useful in identifying quality caches in my area. It's limited to caches with 10 or more favorite points which means it won't identify the good caches until they've been out there for a while, but if you are using it outside your immediate area, that won't matter much as they'll all be new to you anyway. Thanks for the posting.

edexter

Link to comment

I did find this link

http://project-gc.co...stics/TopFavPct

useful in identifying quality caches in my area. It's limited to caches with 10 or more favorite points which means it won't identify the good caches until they've been out there for a while, but if you are using it outside your immediate area, that won't matter much as they'll all be new to you anyway. Thanks for the posting.

edexter

That link does not work.

Link to comment

I did find this link

http://project-gc.co...stics/TopFavPct

useful in identifying quality caches in my area. It's limited to caches with 10 or more favorite points which means it won't identify the good caches until they've been out there for a while, but if you are using it outside your immediate area, that won't matter much as they'll all be new to you anyway. Thanks for the posting.

edexter

That link does not work.

 

http://project-gc.com/Statistics/TopFavPct

Link to comment

It's a mystery to me why this link works: http://project-gc.co...stics/TopFavPct (See MartyBartfast's post and click the underlined link at the bottom)

 

and this link doesn't http://project-gc.co...stics/TopFavPct

but...the web is mysterious.

 

I keep track of fav pts for caches in my area and maintain several "A List"s by geographic area near me for caches that have

1, At least 5 fav. pts and

2, at are favorited by least 25% of the pm finders who log them.

These caches are typically very different than the average cache as they involve some physical effort besides standing and staring...

As noted above, old caches are under represented. Most of the caches are multis, kayak caches or puzzles (some are all three). I estimate that about 60% of caches placed in my area are micros and that they make up about 5% of the caches on the A Lists, which tells me something and maybe you too. Fewer than half the caches placed have ANY fav pts and the median is 1.

edexter

Link to comment

Similar observations to edexter , our two "physical" caches (tech rope climb, and lengthy multi paddle-to) have the most FPs at 59 & 40%, yet have the fewest logged.

Our older (now archived) hides were lucky to have one.

Because of that, I favorited the really old awesome (some archived) caches done years ago, and on most it's the only FP.

At events we hear about favorites, with many saying they won't go to a cache with few anymore, thinking that FP thing actually means something.

We're seeing lpc, guard rail, and roadside caches with multiple FPs.

- Add in the FTF folks (doesn't matter what it is), and the "happy to be out with others on such a beautiful day" gang, and I really don't get it...

I feel it's a shame that these folks are now missing out on some awesome views, and unique areas, simply due to something that hasn't seemed accurate (to me) since its inception.

Edited by cerberus1
Link to comment

Similar observations to edexter , our two "physical" caches (tech rope climb, and lengthy multi paddle-to) have the most FPs at 59 & 40%, yet have the fewest logged.

One of my caches currently has 100% FPs and came equal first in its category in last years regional Cache of the Year Awards, but has only had 8 finds, the last back in January. Admittedly it's a T5 requiring a boat, although some have found a way around that. Another in the series, a 3.5/3 puzzle hidden over a year ago, has 4 FPs from its 5 finds, and the 3/3.5 multi has 4 FPs from 6 finds. My experience has been that caches requiring a bit of time and effort are much more likely to receive a FP, assuming all the elements work and the final is in good nick, but in this time-is-short instant gratification age, will get very few attempting them.

Link to comment

In general, there is an inverse relationship between quantity and quality when it comes to geocaching. What I mean by this is, in general, the greater the number of caches of a similar type (roadside micros for instance) the more popular they will be (more finds) and the lower overall the quality will be (fewer fav pts, and and a lower percentage of fav pts.) Conversely, the fewer the number of caches there are (off road multis with 4 or more stages, for instance) the less popular they will be (fewer finds) and the higher their overall quality (more fav pts and a higher percentage of fav pts). Since only premium members who actually go to a cache can record favorite points, the fav pts totals are the result of self-selection. By this I mean only people who want to do a cache do it and only those folks can "vote". If all fav pts "earned" were awarded and all caches were of equal quality (equally enjoyed by the finders) all caches would have 10% fav pts.

Since we know they aren't all awarded and since we know they aren't equally distributed, we have a means to determine which of the caches actually done are considered to be of higher quality (have higher than average fav pt %) by the folks who actually do them. No matter which type of caching your prefer (roadside or off road) you can use this to filter which of the available caches you are mostly likely to enjoy. This assumes that you care if a cache is "high quality" or not. If you don't care, and many people do not, then this discussion is moot to you. It really only matters to folks who want to spend their time doing "quality caches". If you cache infrequently, then I suggest Clan Rifster's methods to you. If you cache more often, you may need a more detailed filter.

Sure, you say, that's your opinion but where's beef? Here you go. Figures are for recent caches (all caches within a 50 mile radius of my home placed in 2015 where you can tell the location from the cache page. Three categories: 1, Curbside (caches within 10 feet of pavement) 2, Roadside (between 11 feet and 200 yards)3, Offroad (more than 200 yards from pavement. Here's the breakdown of current active caches in these three groups. There are 552 caches in all (72, or 14% have been archived or are currently disabled)

 

1. Curbside: 169 caches 32% of total: all have 30 or more logs; 53 have at least 1 fav pt. (31%) so 69% have none. The median # of fav pts is zero. Seven caches have five or more fav pts. (4%). 22 of the caches have been archived (13%)

 

2, Roadside: 238 caches 46% of total: 186 have 30 or more logs (78%); 112 have at least 1 fav point (47%) so 53% have none. The median number of fav pts is zero. Twenty six caches have 5 or more fav pts (11%) 37 of the caches have been archived (15.5%)

 

3, Offroad: 115 caches 22% of total 57 have 30 or more logs (49%); 86 have at least 1 fav pt (75%) so 25% have none. The median number of fav pts is two. 21 caches have 5 or more fav pts (18%). 13 caches have been archived (11%).

 

The number of caches with both more than 5 fav pts and more than 10% of loggers awarding a fav point breaks out this way: Curbside: 6 of 139 or 4%; Roadside: 14 of 238 or 6% and Offroad: 20 of 115 or 17%

 

So to summarize, based on the responses of folks who actually do the caches and award fav pts the closer to the road a cache is the more popular it will be (more finds) and the lower its average quality (fewer caches with any fav pt, lower average fav pts, and fewer caches with at least 5 favs.) There's not much difference between caches actually on or above pavement and within 200 yards of it. The stuff in the woods is less popular and more well liked at the same time. If you wanna get the good stuff, you've gotta get dirty...

Link to comment

In general, there is an inverse relationship between quantity and quality when it comes to geocaching. What I mean by this is, in general, the greater the number of caches of a similar type (roadside micros for instance) the more popular they will be (more finds) and the lower overall the quality will be (fewer fav pts, and and a lower percentage of fav pts.) Conversely, the fewer the number of caches there are (off road multis with 4 or more stages, for instance) the less popular they will be (fewer finds) and the higher their overall quality (more fav pts and a higher percentage of fav pts). Since only premium members who actually go to a cache can record favorite points, the fav pts totals are the result of self-selection. By this I mean only people who want to do a cache do it and only those folks can "vote". If all fav pts "earned" were awarded and all caches were of equal quality (equally enjoyed by the finders) all caches would have 10% fav pts.

Since we know they aren't all awarded and since we know they aren't equally distributed, we have a means to determine which of the caches actually done are considered to be of higher quality (have higher than average fav pt %) by the folks who actually do them. No matter which type of caching your prefer (roadside or off road) you can use this to filter which of the available caches you are mostly likely to enjoy. This assumes that you care if a cache is "high quality" or not. If you don't care, and many people do not, then this discussion is moot to you. It really only matters to folks who want to spend their time doing "quality caches". If you cache infrequently, then I suggest Clan Rifster's methods to you. If you cache more often, you may need a more detailed filter.

Sure, you say, that's your opinion but where's beef? Here you go. Figures are for recent caches (all caches within a 50 mile radius of my home placed in 2015 where you can tell the location from the cache page. Three categories: 1, Curbside (caches within 10 feet of pavement) 2, Roadside (between 11 feet and 200 yards)3, Offroad (more than 200 yards from pavement. Here's the breakdown of current active caches in these three groups. There are 552 caches in all (72, or 14% have been archived or are currently disabled)

 

1. Curbside: 169 caches 32% of total: all have 30 or more logs; 53 have at least 1 fav pt. (31%) so 69% have none. The median # of fav pts is zero. Seven caches have five or more fav pts. (4%). 22 of the caches have been archived (13%)

 

2, Roadside: 238 caches 46% of total: 186 have 30 or more logs (78%); 112 have at least 1 fav point (47%) so 53% have none. The median number of fav pts is zero. Twenty six caches have 5 or more fav pts (11%) 37 of the caches have been archived (15.5%)

 

3, Offroad: 115 caches 22% of total 57 have 30 or more logs (49%); 86 have at least 1 fav pt (75%) so 25% have none. The median number of fav pts is two. 21 caches have 5 or more fav pts (18%). 13 caches have been archived (11%).

 

The number of caches with both more than 5 fav pts and more than 10% of loggers awarding a fav point breaks out this way: Curbside: 6 of 139 or 4%; Roadside: 14 of 238 or 6% and Offroad: 20 of 115 or 17%

 

So to summarize, based on the responses of folks who actually do the caches and award fav pts the closer to the road a cache is the more popular it will be (more finds) and the lower its average quality (fewer caches with any fav pt, lower average fav pts, and fewer caches with at least 5 favs.) There's not much difference between caches actually on or above pavement and within 200 yards of it. The stuff in the woods is less popular and more well liked at the same time. If you wanna get the good stuff, you've gotta get dirty...

 

That's a lot of number crunching! Another great way to filter caches by the qaulity is the Wilson score on ProjectGC.

Link to comment

I try to only put out caches that I would like to find and so I have accumulated

 

Owned:50, 18 now archived (36.00%)

Total finds of my caches:1421 finds in 724 total days, 0.39/day, 2.71/week, 11.74/month

Total finders of my caches:502

Total finds I've made:463

Hide with the most favorite points:27, A Little Bird Told Me Travel Bug Hotel, GC467Y2

Total favorite points received:247 (25.2%)

We don't really have that much geocaching activity locally so has always been an ongoing struggle of do I put yet another one out that is only going to be found 3 or 4 times a year.

Link to comment

do I put yet another one out that is only going to be found 3 or 4 times a year.[/size]

 

Well, if you are looking for feedback, Yes, Place the seldom found much loved cache rather than the often found forgetable P&G.

Here's my rationale: The great majority of geocachers are only going to do the quick and easy so they get the vast majority of finds and few favorite points. It's basically just for the numbers (both for the finders and the placers) and the cache is soon forgotten. But a small subset of finders and hiders enjoy the effort involved in creating and finding more interesting caches which end up with few finds and many favorites. And folks remember the good ones...Quality over Quantity any day.

edexter

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...
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...