The new search function

[+The Wandering Wierdos]

How can I search for caches (a long way from home) with a certain word in the name?

[+noncentric]

How can I search for caches (a long way from home) with a certain word in the name?

If the cache is in the USA or Germany, then you can search within an entire state. If the cache is outside USA and Germany, then you can search within an entire country. However, you cannot do a global search for a cache by name within the search. Below is an example of how to search for a cache by name (see blue box for where you'd enter the partial name).

 

 

If you don't know the state/country of your search, then you could try using the old search to see if that gives you any better results: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=0

 

FYI -- "The A-Team" assembled information from various forum posts and webpages to create a detailed guide to using the 'new' search. You can find a link to that guide in this post.

[+The Wandering Wierdos]

I am LOW tech I don't know what save as bookmark means or how to do it. I know you are just trying to help but all that stuff is like a different language Sorry

 

Hi gonefishing2, perhaps the image below will help a bit. It shows how to search within a specific state. The main thing, which is not at all intuitive, is to leave the main search box empty and click the "Add Filters" button to get to the filters screen. Since you're a Premium Member, then this should work for you.

 

(1) "Geocache Types" section - the image below is filtered only to Event, but will start off with all selected

(2) Enter your state in the "Search Only In..." box - the image below is for North Carolina, but start typing "Texas" and your state will show up

(3) Hit "Search" button

 

Hope that gets you what you're looking for. Good luck!

 

 

I tried this and it does not work. I cleared all my filters, placed state of Oregon in and only checked Events - The report said DNF. It appears that the web search is not working today. Huh?

[+noncentric]

.

Edited March 24, 2015 by noncentric

[+HHL]

[...]If the cache is in the USA or Germany, then you can search within an entire state.[...]

This is also true for: Italy, Sweden, Norway, Czech Republic, Austria and some other European countries.

 

Hans

Edited March 24, 2015 by HHL

[+niraD]

[...]If the cache is in the USA or Germany, then you can search within an entire state.[...]

This is also true for: Italy, Sweden, Norway, Czech Republic, Austria and some other European countries.

True. The difference is that for the USA or Germany, you can search for an entire state, but you cannot search for the entire country. For a number of other countries (which don't have as many caches as the USA or Germany), you can search for an entire state, or you can search for the entire country.

[+The A-Team]

I do a fair amount of work with vocabularies and ontologies. When searching for a term in a vocabulary there is a notion of a "best match", the "preferred term" (i.e. Greece the country may be the preferred term) and "alternate term". If a term is ambiguous, then perhaps a "Did you mean" dialog box and a list of "alternate terms" could be used to specify what the user wants rather than have the search engine guess what the user wants. Just to avoid confusion, an "alternate term" may be the same word, but with different meanings (is Georgia a country, or is it a State?)

Here are my thoughts on this.

 

What I think might work is if the main search field provided suggestions similar to the "Search only in" field. To use the Greece example, I envision someone typing it in and some live suggestions being displayed below the field like this:

• Greece (country) - Search within this area
  
• Look up the place "Greece" - Search a radius around this point (<-- This would then use the geocoder)
  

For Georgia:

• Georgia (state) - Search within this area
  
• Georgia (country) - Search within this area
  
• Look up the place "Georgia" - Search a radius around this point (<-- This would then use the geocoder)
  

Ideally, the searches passed to the geocoder would omit the regions otherwise listed. That is, a request to the geocoder for "Greece" would ignore the country and therefore (likely) return Greece, New York, since if the user wanted the country they would have selected that option. If Groundspeak set up their own in-house geocoder (which would remove the freeloading limits), they could even have the suggestions display down to the city level or deeper. For example, as you type in "Georgia", it would show the state, country, the city in Indiana, the city in Vermont, etc., like you'd see if you were typing it into Google Maps. An in-house geocoder could also be more easily configured to omit the regions as I mentioned above.

 

Of course, this is all pie-in-the-sky thinking. I doubt Groundspeak has the time or resources to run their own geocoder, and I think they're already too invested in the current search tool (see pot committed) to make any major changes to it. I doubt they'll start all over from scratch, even if that would result in a much better tool in the end.

[+Amanda and Knobbie]

We don't like that some of the search option are gone from the website update. We regularly used to search state caches. We live in Delaware and it was always helpful traveling to other very nearby states. The 30 mile function is limiting. We really miss the ability to search by the oldest in each state as that was our goal. I hope geocaching HQ listens to us! Bring back "by state" searches!

[+noncentric]

We don't like that some of the search option are gone from the website update. We regularly used to search state caches. We live in Delaware and it was always helpful traveling to other very nearby states. The 30 mile function is limiting. We really miss the ability to search by the oldest in each state as that was our goal. I hope geocaching HQ listens to us! Bring back "by state" searches!

"The A-Team" assembled information from various forum posts and webpages to create a detailed guide to using the 'new' search. You can find a link to that guide in this post.

 

For finding statewide caches, then do not enter anything in the first search box and click "Add Filters" instead. See the screenshots further up in this thread:

 

• Search of all caches in Delaware that have not been found by Amanda and Knobbie: =Amanda+and+Knobbie&r=9"]Results link here
   
  
• The results list can be sorted oldest/newest by clicking on the "Placed On" column name. Click once to sort newest to oldest, and again to sort oldest to newest. Clicking on the various column names will sort the results by that column.
   
  
• The search results can be viewed on a map by clicking "Map These Results" on the Results page. The link is in the lower right corner of the mountains image that spans the top of the page.
   
  
• If this gives you results, then you can click "Change Filters" in the Results page and made adjustments to the filters (like selecting a different state or filtering to show only specific cache types), then click "Update Search".
  

The new search doesn't yet allow downloading results. So you may prefer to use the old Advanced Search, but no guarantees how long this page will remain running: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=0

 

Hope that helps.

Edited March 25, 2015 by noncentric

[+piptom]

The new search function is the very worst update you have done.

 

It is NOT faster, it is more cumbersome to use.

 

It is SLOWER - NOT faster as you have stated.

 

It only provides a few finds, so if I move elsewhere I have to search again - what use is that?

 

Today I am trying to search for caches in my area - and it displays the map but NO CACHES!!!

 

Please bring back the old and better search tool - I will review my interest in geocaching if you don't.

 

There is a saying - don't fix it if it isn't broken - well it was fine but now it IS BROKEN!

 

Put the old one back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[+Team BikeFast]

Add me to the list! Absolutely spoiling the game for me. It stinks, big time. Not all changes are good ones.

[+qbee37]

Oh, I get it, if we WANT to find something, we should leave the search box blank. Yeah, that's intuitive.

[+joytoy1963]

What other stupid idea is on the table ? Change the search area to 150 miles instead of 30 miles, that's worthless, remember geocachers like to travel. Why should we pay for a service that is NOT making your clients happy? We don't need "Not found by" change it to "Found By". Geocachers talk about the caches they found. Just imagine if 5000 clients decide not to renew their memberships? That is 149,950.00 dollars that you won't see.

[+niraD]

We don't need "Not found by" change it to "Found By".

Sure we do. If I go geocaching with you, then I just might want a list of caches that are "Not found by joytoy1963" that I have not found either.

[+noncentric]

We don't need "Not found by" change it to "Found By". Geocachers talk about the caches they found.

Actually, "not found by" is helpful and cachers asked for that feature to be added to the search funtionality. If I'm going caching with two other people, then I'll search to see what caches all three of us haven't found yet. It's difficult to determine what 'we' don't need without first asking everyone's opinion.

 

As a Premium Member, you can find all the caches you've found by using the filter in the upper right corner...just select "I've found".

 

If you want to see all the caches that someone else found, then go to their profile and select the Geocaches tab. I can appreciate that there's an extra step for this, as it can make some people more comfortable about other people being able to see their latest activities. I don't see that extra step as a huge hurdle to overcome if trying to see someone else's activity.

Edited March 26, 2015 by noncentric

[+Molveno]

The new one is really not good .

 

The previous search function was very good !

# structured

# Clear

# Easy to use

# Left the search fields (hidden or shown or hidden)

right side of the card

 

Now it looks more modern - but is bad .

 

Please, bring back the previous search. I hope soon.

 

Thanks, Molveno

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I do a fair amount of work with vocabularies and ontologies. When searching for a term in a vocabulary there is a notion of a "best match", the "preferred term" (i.e. Greece the country may be the preferred term) and "alternate term". If a term is ambiguous, then perhaps a "Did you mean" dialog box and a list of "alternate terms" could be used to specify what the user wants rather than have the search engine guess what the user wants. Just to avoid confusion, an "alternate term" may be the same word, but with different meanings (is Georgia a country, or is it a State?)

Here are my thoughts on this.

 

What I think might work is if the main search field provided suggestions similar to the "Search only in" field. To use the Greece example, I envision someone typing it in and some live suggestions being displayed below the field like this:

• Greece (country) - Search within this area
• Look up the place "Greece" - Search a radius around this point (<-- This would then use the geocoder)

For Georgia:

• Georgia (state) - Search within this area
• Georgia (country) - Search within this area
• Look up the place "Georgia" - Search a radius around this point (<-- This would then use the geocoder)

 

I know that GS probably wants to keep the single search box, but using an auto-suggest feature for city/state/countries might be difficult if one wants to type in lat/long coordinate, a GC code, or "Home".

 

Ideally, the searches passed to the geocoder would omit the regions otherwise listed. That is, a request to the geocoder for "Greece" would ignore the country and therefore (likely) return Greece, New York, since if the user wanted the country they would have selected that option. If Groundspeak set up their own in-house geocoder (which would remove the freeloading limits), they could even have the suggestions display down to the city level or deeper. For example, as you type in "Georgia", it would show the state, country, the city in Indiana, the city in Vermont, etc., like you'd see if you were typing it into Google Maps. An in-house geocoder could also be more easily configured to omit the regions as I mentioned above.

 

Of course, this is all pie-in-the-sky thinking. I doubt Groundspeak has the time or resources to run their own geocoder, and I think they're already too invested in the current search tool (see pot committed) to make any major changes to it. I doubt they'll start all over from scratch, even if that would result in a much better tool in the end.

 

It's been awhile since I've looked but at one time I downloaded the geonames data (it was free to download but it was just the data) to see about creating an in-house geocoder. It was over 10GB and doesn't include the server side code for looking up data. I have, however, developed something that uses their auto-suggest service to get a list of locations just you describe above. It basically returns a select list and once the end user chooses an item from the list it makes a second request to the server (using the geonamesID) to get the full record for that location.

 

 

[+Yvn-Geeert]

My advanced search never finds any caches.

I even tried my own geocache with the exact name. And it says "sorry, nothing was found"??

[+Derb522002]

I think it is sad that GS does not seem to be listening to public that like the old search. It seems a lot of us have a problem with the new search. I am a premium member and I dont like the search. There is alot of talk even on facebook on how people dont like the new search.

 

I think Groundspeak go back to the old search that was a lot easier to use. I dont know if this will happen because they dont seem to listen to us.

[+arcbaker]

Wish people would leave well enough alone. Everything has to be a so called update when all they do is destroy what was working just fine. Get rid of this stupid 30 mile limit crap. Because of it I can't see the "Going Ape Event". You can't expect people to attend something if they don't know it exist! The new layout is so spread out it takes forever to try and locate something worth going for. And the map is now a useless blob in the Puget Sound area. I was going to plan some caching around my up coming trip to SD. But I guess geocaching no longer exist outside the hub of HQ. Maybe as cachers drop their premium membership $$$$, HQ will listen up.

[+Molveno]

It's a bug - not a feature

 

Search the internet MUST be self-explanatory!

No one wants to read lengthy instructions!

 

By trying I noticed today that I search for a cache name I also have to select the country in search

But it does not work for Germany!

I can only select Germany together with a federal country !!!

 

What a nonsense !!!

 

I live in a three federal country corner - how do I know by name search, whether "Lower Saxony" in or "Thuringia" or "Sachsen-Anhalt"?

 

I have worked for 25 years in IT, since 2008 as a test manager.

The new search technical conditions for the user have not been taken into account.

 

Please, bring back the previous search. I hope soon!!!

 

Regards

Molveno

Edited March 26, 2015 by Molveno

[+Molveno]

Worldwide is not available, but you can do it for a given country/region. Can you explain why you would need to do a worldwide search in order to find a cache?

 

That is not correkt!

By given country/region for Germany not possible!!! Search Germany no longer exists...

It is only searching about Germany + Federal state.

That are 16 different search requests...

 

What a nonsens !!!

[+bd's]

The new search seems to have taken away anything I ever used. I don't really have any use for what there is now. The 30 mile limit on a search is really a pain. I take less time randomly clicking caches on the map than using the search. It appears that there wasn't a whole lot of thought put into what is actually useful. If I search for "XYZ Cache" it should show up, no matter where it's located.

[+stone-cacher]

Worldwide is not available, but you can do it for a given country/region. Can you explain why you would need to do a worldwide search in order to find a cache?

 

Even if not everybody can image why a world wide search can be interesting the need still exists.

I used to search for certain names or words to find those caches having these in their name - worldwide.

But it even hasn't to be a world wide search to show that the new search function is not as good as the old one.

As said here many times: There are countries like USA and Germany which can not be searched as a whole in one step.

In the USA you have do to 52 searches and in Germany 16 to cover the whole country. So it is impossible to find all caches of the "Deutschlandtour" with one search by name. Sorry, but this is a mess!

 

And sorry again: the number of caches hidden in those countries is high but nowadays this can not really be the reason to limit search capacities. I don't compare Groundspeak with Google or Bing or other really big search engines, but I still think that good algorithms are more important than a modern look. AND, we should not forget: It worked before!

 

By the way: In the announcement for the updates on March, 25th: Not a single word about the new search function and that something might change in future releases. I'm really thinking about stopping my premium membership and maybe move to an alternative platform if Groundspeak continues to behave as they do currently. It's not my wish but so many limitations coming up for premium members and even more for basic members does not really convince me to stay with Groundspeak. It really looks like forcing people to become premium members has become the main target. I'm really frustrated and my geocaching activities have already gone down. What a pitty

[+thebruce0]

In the USA you have do to 52 searches and in Germany 16 to cover the whole country. So it is impossible to find all caches of the "Deutschlandtour" with one search by name. Sorry, but this is a mess!

Maybe we just had different preferences, but if I were looking for caches in a series (an actual series, not just common words in titles), the first place I'd look would be people's bookmark lists. I wouldn't do a keyword search over an entire enormous country. If that didn't work, I'd use google with site:geocaching.com intitle:deutschlandtour (for example) and see what I could find. There's no search method that you can guarantee finding everything you're looking for

If you're trying to do a search that vague, I'd suggest getting used to and practicing a number of different ways to search the geocache database. You'll get more results that way

 

And sorry again: the number of caches hidden in those countries is high but nowadays this can not really be the reason to limit search capacities.

Generally, I completely agree. But we don't know the internal structure of their database(s) and server(s)... but I still feel that sometimes the limitations are a little too stringent.

[+Team Taran]

If you need to search the United States and Germany as a whole, you can do it using pocket queries. It takes a bit to set it up but it only needs to be done once. I'm hoping they will add the new search options to the pocket query choices soon.

[+stone-cacher]

If you need to search the United States and Germany as a whole, you can do it using pocket queries. It takes a bit to set it up but it only needs to be done once. I'm hoping they will add the new search options to the pocket query choices soon.

 

Sorry, but pocket queries are limited to 1000 caches and they don't allow a "search by name".

So PQ is not an option. And even if it was: Why are basic users not allowed to search more than 30miles around a center point. Sorry, but I still do not like the limitations of the new search even though some points are not bad. The total result is not as good as it could be. Listening to customers and adapting to their needs would be much better than imposing new things (unless you want to be a monopolist and/or dictator <- sorry for this word coming from a german user).

[+stone-cacher]

In the USA you have do to 52 searches and in Germany 16 to cover the whole country. So it is impossible to find all caches of the "Deutschlandtour" with one search by name. Sorry, but this is a mess!

 

Maybe we just had different preferences, but if I were looking for caches in a series (an actual series, not just common words in titles), the first place I'd look would be people's bookmark lists. I wouldn't do a keyword search over an entire enormous country. If that didn't work, I'd use google with site:geocaching.com intitle:deutschlandtour (for example) and see what I could find. There's no search method that you can guarantee finding everything you're looking for

If you're trying to do a search that vague, I'd suggest getting used to and practicing a number of different ways to search the geocache database. You'll get more results that way

 

I don't understand why I should use other tools than GC to find GC-Caches. Maybe Google searches work as you write, but will they find premium member caches as well? Yes I agree that a bookmark list can be a solution - but only if created and maintained done by somebody and, of corse, made public. The "Deutschland" was just an example for which a bookmark list does exist . But there are also "free" series which use common settings or texts and titles to show that they are a part of these series. In Germany there are for example series for churches. No one is able or willing to search (here we are again) new caches, which are part of these series, as every owner can publish it at any time and everywhere. As I said: Just an example and just a comment to show that people are using the GC pages in different ways. There is not THE ONE AND ONLY way. That's what makes menkind so interesting.

 

By the way: I think searching for a keyword like "Deutschlandtour" is not vague

[+thebruce0]

I don't understand why I should use other tools than GC to find GC-Caches.

You shouldn't have to. Unless they don't care to offer that ability; which likely isn't the case anyway.

My suggestion was a way to allow you to do that during whatever time period you can't. In the past that has been my preference because I found it easier. So, you can make use of the suggestion or not, entirely up to you.

 

Maybe Google searches work as you write, but will they find premium member caches as well?

As my suggestion uses the indexed url and page title, which is public and not restricted to non-premium caches, then yes it works for PM caches.

 

Yes I agree that a bookmark list can be a solution - but only if created and maintained done by somebody and, of corse, made public.

Yep, I didn't say it was perfect. In fact I said the opposite.

 

In Germany there are for example series for churches. No one is able or willing to search (here we are again) new caches, which are part of these series, as every owner can publish it at any time and everywhere.

We have similar themes here. And yeah, if no one makes bookmark lists and multiple people publish them, then it's much harder to locate them all, if you so desire. But as I mentioned earlier, no search method will guarantee finding every cache if they're like that. Learn each of the ways of searching, and use them as best you can, and you stand a better chance of finding all that you're looking for

Edited March 27, 2015 by thebruce0

[+noncentric]

My advanced search never finds any caches.

I even tried my own geocache with the exact name. And it says "sorry, nothing was found"??

 

I think Post #152 in this thread might be helpful for you. The image is an example for New Zealand, but you can substitute Netherlands or another country...except for US/Germany you cannot search by country, but just state.

 

For example, I just ran a search for Netherlands that contains the word "horster": Search Results sorted alphabetically by Geocache Name

 

Hope that helps.

[+God of Caching]

I HATE THIS NEW SEARCH OPTION!! There I got that off my chest. I don't understnad why GS feels the need to "freshen" things up every few months...is it to keep us interested in geocaching? I think not, because only about 2-3 changes ever make the community happy. I wish GS would leave things that work alone and actually fix things that need it. So irritating to get on the site to find something that worked perfectly, changed to something that is a pile of crap. So dumb.

Edited March 27, 2015 by God of Caching

[+Team Taran]

I'm sorry but the new search system actually provided some new functions I find helpful and didn't remove any functions I used. I know that is not true of everyone since I realize that everyone approaches things differently but . I think it's important to remember that far fewer people bother to compliment than to complain. I would also suggest that it would be more productive to try to learn how to use the new features or alternate ways to use the site asking specific questions or providing constructive criticism is more productive than to say you hate it. That really doesn't provide much useful information to the developers.

[Ross_70]

Why does not the new search work?

Just wanted "traditions" in Germany, but can not choose the country ...

The field is disabled!!! I can not see why - there is no message output!!!

A search must be self-explanatory today!

 

A search must be self-explanatory today!

I want inside quickly and easily plan the tour and outside have time to play !!!!!!!!!!!

 

Why use a new search and then 2 screens? Completely unnecessary !!!

 

I wanted to upgrade now, but this new search is like MS!

There is really well-made software, but it must indeed be again and again ... And this new development is then bad !!!

 

Will you have to secure a job ...? Anyway, this work should be filled!

 

Anyway, I'll NOT a premium member. I give no money for it !!!

 

Bye - the disappointed Ross

Edited March 28, 2015 by Keystone
Removed potty language.

[+Trail Mongers]

Well all I can say about the NEW SEARCH (really) FEATURE.... It STINKS in plain English....

After jumping thru hoops to get where I want. (The newest caches in New Hampshire) It gives me up to 18 miles and then BAM !!!!

I'm in Washington State !!!!!!! Just what a good search engine should do right ????? Now I followed all the instructions per the Lackeys.

It's time to start leaving things that work alone. New is not always better.

I'm ready to give up the P.M. and the word in this area is let's all give it up.

Maybe if enough give up P.M. and it hits the pocketbook someone will say "Time to put things back the way cachers want"

[+noncentric]

Maybe if enough give up P.M. and it hits the pocketbook someone will say "Time to put things back the way cachers want"

Some of the new features are things that cachers specifically asked for. Such as "Not Found By", searching for a partial cache name, and searching for caches with/without corrected coordinates or personal cache notes. The wrapper around these new features may have some flaws.

 

After jumping thru hoops to get where I want. (The newest caches in New Hampshire) It gives me up to 18 miles and then BAM !!!!

I'm in Washington State !!!!!!! Just what a good search engine should do right ????? Now I followed all the instructions per the Lackeys.

If the instructions from the Lackeys didn't help, then you could look at some instructions that have been assembled by fellow cachers. "The A-Team" assembled created a detailed guide to using the 'new' search, and a link to that guide is in this post.

 

Here are the newest caches in the state of New Hampshire (1000 results). This excludes Event caches, since those have recent dates. New Hampshire Search Results

 

If the link works, then you can click "Change Filters" in the Results page to see what filters were applied and to adjust the filters. Just click "Update Search" to get new results with different filters. As others have commented in the forums, there's currently no method to download the search results.

If the link doesn't work, then I'd suggest closing your web browser and re-opening...then trying again. Maybe your browser is somehow saving the search parameters you entered before.

 

If all else fails, you could try using the old Advanced Search, but no guarantees how long this page will remain available: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=0

 

---

Sorting search results by oldest/newest

[+Yvn-Geeert]

My advanced search never finds any caches.

I even tried my own geocache with the exact name. And it says "sorry, nothing was found"??

 

I think Post #152 in this thread might be helpful for you. The image is an example for New Zealand, but you can substitute Netherlands or another country...except for US/Germany you cannot search by country, but just state.

 

For example, I just ran a search for Netherlands that contains the word "horster": Search Results sorted alphabetically by Geocache Name

 

Hope that helps.

 

Thanks! That helped.

I have my geocaching site in the language Dutch. So I filled in 'nederland' in stead of 'netherlands'. That was the problem

 

Thanks!! It works for me now

[+calgalmo:)]

I am LOW tech I don't know what save as bookmark means or how to do it. I know you are just trying to help but all that stuff is like a different language Sorry

 

Hi gonefishing2, perhaps the image below will help a bit. It shows how to search within a specific state. The main thing, which is not at all intuitive, is to leave the main search box empty and click the "Add Filters" button to get to the filters screen. Since you're a Premium Member, then this should work for you.

 

(1) "Geocache Types" section - the image below is filtered only to Event, but will start off with all selected

(2) Enter your state in the "Search Only In..." box - the image below is for North Carolina, but start typing "Texas" and your state will show up

(3) Hit "Search" button

 

Hope that gets you what you're looking for. Good luck!

 

 

I tried this and it does not work. I cleared all my filters, placed state of Oregon in and only checked Events - The report said DNF. It appears that the web search is not working today. Huh?

I tried this too, It reads 'radius is required'

[+Team Bullis]

We don't need "Not found by" change it to "Found By". Geocachers talk about the caches they found.

Actually, "not found by" is helpful and cachers asked for that feature to be added to the search funtionality. If I'm going caching with two other people, then I'll search to see what caches all three of us haven't found yet. It's difficult to determine what 'we' don't need without first asking everyone's opinion.

 

As a Premium Member, you can find all the caches you've found by using the filter in the upper right corner...just select "I've found".

 

If you want to see all the caches that someone else found, then go to their profile and select the Geocaches tab. I can appreciate that there's an extra step for this, as it can make some people more comfortable about other people being able to see their latest activities. I don't see that extra step as a huge hurdle to overcome if trying to see someone else's activity.

 

First off, I like the new search engine. I see it's benefits. However, I too cannot find certain things I used to search by, such as Found by Cacher. OK, so you say go to their profile and do an extra click or two. OK, but how do I get to their profile. There is no search for Geocacher that I can see. If you want to find Team Bullis, how are you going to do it (without clicking on my name to the left, LOL).

 

Thanks for the input.

[+MartyBartfast]

OK, but how do I get to their profile. There is no search for Geocacher that I can see. If you want to find Team Bullis, how are you going to do it (without clicking on my name to the left, LOL).

 

Go here http://www.geocaching.com/my/Default.aspx over on the right there's a bunch of useful links, one of which is "find another player" whichh has been there for years.

[+Team Bullis]

OK, but how do I get to their profile. There is no search for Geocacher that I can see. If you want to find Team Bullis, how are you going to do it (without clicking on my name to the left, LOL).

 

Go here http://www.geocaching.com/my/Default.aspx over on the right there's a bunch of useful links, one of which is "find another player" whichh has been there for years.

 

OMG! You are right! Those have been there so long and I've never used them.

 

Thanks.

[+noncentric]

I tried this too, It reads 'radius is required'

It should only show "radius is required" if something was entered in the main search box (on the screen before placing the filters). You may want to try closing your web browser and then re-opening. Maybe your browser is somehow saving the search parameters you entered before.

 

Hopefully, that works. I was able to run the same search as in the image without the radius message.

-- North Carolina events: Search Results

-- Alberta events: Search Results

-- Canada events: Search Results

 

If the links work, then you can click "Change Filters" in the Results page to see what filters were applied and to adjust the filters. Just click "Update Search" to get new results with different filters.

[+x_xenolith_x]

Forgive me of this has been stated. There are 4 pages on this thread and did not read through page 2-4.

 

Since the new function was implemented and did not have the time to use the new search until now. It DOESN'T work properly. I will give a few examples:

 

1.I do not cache by a major town or city.. Like the country hides. Take for instance that we would like to have a trip 15 miles west of Sacramento, the only way is to search for Sacramento and only gives the hides in that city.

2. No way to move the search in a different direction.. still have city hides.

3. If I used the search function from the home page (Search for Nearby Geocaches) .. Will have 30+ moves {(Turlock, ca Home base} to where we want to go) to map the correct location. (does GS pay my deductible for carpel tunnel syndrome)?

4. The only other option is to go to a 3rd party site like USPS, GMAPS and get coord's, (how will I know the GCxxxx) then come back to geocaching.com.. paste and search again. DUMB....

5. MOST IMPORTANT.. new search does not enable you to slide the left pane to filter traditionals, puzzles or what ever as the search from the main page. Like that ability.

 

For a hobby/sport.. this is really taking a lot of energy and frustration. It's all about planning a nice trip to see the countryside and have fun. Please make the game fun again...

[+NeverSummer]

So, I'm headed on vacation to England. I tried to search for caches within a certain city, but it didn't work. Without coordinates to enter for a city center, how can I tell the search, "No, not THAT St. Ives...I want Saint Ives, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom"

 

Then, when I choose another nearby city, the map does not provide an update to the cache listing. Can't functionality be added to be more like the iPhone official App, where you can then say "Load results for this location..." or whatever?

 

I liked the new search at first, but now I can't get it to work in a usable way.

[+thebruce0]

If you know of a cache in/near the place you're going to be, just put that GC code as the center point. If you have the standard map bookmarked, use that first, find a GC where you're going, then use the advanced search.

Workaround, not a solution, but should help to make life easier and less angsty in the meantime ;P

[+goldentree]

TODAY I FOUND AN ADDED LINK ON THE SEARCH FIELD DIRECTING TO: Take me to the old Search.

 

It seems Groundspeak was reading our complaints and gave back our former search options next to the new ones.

 

Now they only have to add tickboxes with the new search list to enable us to upload a selection to our GPS.

[+rcm999]

IT'S BAAAACK! Finally, Groundspeak must have listened to the customers; you know, the folks who actually fund Groundspeak. I am so glad to see the option of the old search. My old reliable friend is at my fingertips once again. Now I can go caching like I want. Thanks to all the Lackeys who brought the reliable search back around.

[Pup Patrol]

Release Notes - March 30, 2015

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=330903

 

Read the previous Release Notes

 

We’ve received tons of great feedback about the new Search tool since its release earlier this month. This feedback is invaluable as we continue to build this ever-improving product. Our team is hard at work on the next round of improvements!

 

We recognize, though, that learning the ins and outs of the new tool will take some time.

 

To that end, we’re keeping the old Search around a bit longer.

 

With today’s site release, we’ve made that page easier to find by adding a link to it from the new Search page.

 

Questions? Check out the Advanced Search FAQ in the Geocaching Help Center.

 

The release also includes a healthy dose of bug squashing.

 

B.

[+Photo40d]

The main search box is for entering your location information (that's why it shows City, State, GC code...).

 

Based on what I'm seeing in that main search box, I should be able to enter a GC code and it should bring me the cache. I did that and had 2,218 results (for supposedly one GC code). As I don't have record of the cache name, I don't know how to find it now. Ideas?

[+niraD]

Based on what I'm seeing in that main search box, I should be able to enter a GC code and it should bring me the cache. I did that and had 2,218 results (for supposedly one GC code).

The main search box does one thing and one thing only. It specifies the center of your search radius. It does that with anything you enter into it.

 

So if you enter a GC code, then the coordinates of that GC code are used to specify the center of your search radius. Because that's what the main search box does.

 

As I don't have record of the cache name, I don't know how to find it now. Ideas?

Go to the www.geocaching.com welcome page and enter the GC code there.

 

Type coord.info/gc12345 into your browser's address bar (replacing gc12345 with the appropriate GC code).

 

Select Play > Log a Geocache, then enter the GC code there.

[+Konza Coyote]

I posted a week or so back about the frustration I encountered with the search function. This weekend, my frustrations grew. Granted, I've learned a few tips and tricks to help me navigate this "new, improved, intuitive" crap. It's still not shiny. It's certainly got a long way to go.

1) This 30 mile radius needs to stop. It's limiting in so many ways. I heard a rumor that server space was an issue and that was why the limit. But, I also know that Groundspeak uses the cloud heavily. Server space shouldn't be a problem. Server access should be anticipated and planned for. Bad juju.

2) The search function filters just can't do much. The ability to find caches to fit challenge requirements requires some serious thinking. I used to be able to pull up all the caches in my state, adjust by placement date, distance, or D/T. Nope! Not any more!

3)Not all the caches inside the 30 mile radius show up. Why does this problem still exist? It happened on the old search engine as well. Why?

4) The page still feels like an insult to my intelligence. And yes, the whole radius restriction and no recognition for tiny towns really irritates me.

 

It's sad when an unofficial app does a better job than the main source.