Jump to content

D/T Matrix geocaches


Recommended Posts

Is there a way to make a list of geocaches I need to fill my next matrix? P.e. I got it 6 times, I want to see which geocaches are available for my 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th D/T Matrix, within a radius of a 100km.

Link to post
11 hours ago, StefandD said:

Go to your Statistics page, find your D/T matrix and click on the D/T you desire. Then you get a list with all the caches in your neighbourhood.

 

Really?  You can complete a D/T matrix just from your neighborhood?  I've been playing since 2007 and haven't completed it once.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Amazing, with less than 2000 finds. I haven't completed it yet and I have over 11,000 finds. Even though my area is packed with caches, it's hard to find the last three I need to complete it once. Are these caches you have found made especially for people to fill the grid?

  • Upvote 3
Link to post

You need people in your region who want to place caches that fill those DT holes (ideally, legitimately). Ontario has quite a few cache owners who do that, which is why so many in our region have upwards 10-30 or more fizzy loops. SO many high D and T caches, especially rarer ones.

Link to post
3 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

You need people in your region who want to place caches that fill those DT holes (ideally, legitimately). Ontario has quite a few cache owners who do that, which is why so many in our region have upwards 10-30 or more fizzy loops. SO many high D and T caches, especially rarer ones.

Wow so lucky. Completely different in Nova Scotia the top one has 11 fizzy loops and I am tied 7th with 3...

 

A geoart with the 81 real D/T got published last year to help a bit but not as much as Ontario. 

 

 

Link to post

Honestly, it's all the tree climbs (low D high T), challenge caches (high D and T), and wide lake and long river paddle series (high counts of mixes of high Ds and Ts).  There are a couple of series that populate a good chunk of the grid on their own, if not the full grid (there's still the DT cube of which a surprising amount still are not solved and/or found).  Ontario has a crazy landscape. Not very vertical, but a beautiful variety. That certainly helps

Link to post
21 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

You need people in your region who want to place caches that fill those DT holes (ideally, legitimately). Ontario has quite a few cache owners who do that, which is why so many in our region have upwards 10-30 or more fizzy loops. SO many high D and T caches, especially rarer ones.

 

That's alway felt backwards to me.  

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to post
On 2/14/2021 at 1:32 PM, Goldenwattle said:

Amazing, with less than 2000 finds. I haven't completed it yet and I have over 11,000 finds. Even though my area is packed with caches, it's hard to find the last three I need to complete it once. Are these caches you have found made especially for people to fill the grid?

 

Come over to my place, Goldenwattle. You are missing difficulty 5, terrain 2.5 and I own two of them. :-)

 

I didn't care for filling the matrix in the first years (and in the beginning I didn't know about the ratings at all ;-)) and I think I found about 70 to 75 of the ratings by chance. Then I started looking for the missing ratings and it still took me about a year to fill them (as I was not so active then and didn't take it two serious). The first loop was really fulfilling - that moment when I found the last missing rating (4.5/4.5). :-))

 

Getting to the second and third and fourth ... loop seemed to be much easier than and it wasn't too fulfilling anymore. :-( I know some cachers who have 100 and more loops (and specialise on that) but I don't see the reason why. But if they feel that's necessary....

 

Later I found a challenge about filling the 81 matrix with only traditionals, only unknown caches and only mystery caches. That was something new to try and it took my some more years and I have to admit that that was again a good feeling finding the last cache needed. I have never logged the challenge but that doesn't matter. :-)

I once had a challenge cache about doing the 81 rating combinations in one day - that was too crazy for me, that sounds more like a statistics game than fun. But per haps I'll find a new 81 challenge one day - but not the 81 FTF matrix some friends of mine are close to fill. :-)

 

I had to take a look and - surprisingly - my grid is filled 28 times by now. Am I a super cacher now? :-)

  • Funny 3
Link to post
1 hour ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

That's alway felt backwards to me.  

 

Meh, as long as the geocaches and ratings are legitimate, it really doesn't bother me what reason a cache owner has to place them. If they place them to give people more reason to want to find them (for whatever purpose or experience), IMHO I find absolutely nothing wrong with that. :)

Link to post
3 hours ago, Lynx Humble said:

This kind of challenges is stupid it's almost impossible to qualify for it now because most of the qualifying cache are archived.

I agree that it is a problem.  We have been trying to get Kealia to change it for years now. But it does seem to be what NYPaddleCacher would like! 

Link to post
On 2/17/2021 at 9:11 AM, NYPaddleCacher said:
On 2/16/2021 at 11:53 AM, thebruce0 said:

You need people in your region who want to place caches that fill those DT holes (ideally, legitimately). Ontario has quite a few cache owners who do that, which is why so many in our region have upwards 10-30 or more fizzy loops. SO many high D and T caches, especially rarer ones.

That's alway felt backwards to me.  

I agree laying out caches to blanket the grid is backwards. But, on the other hand, I don't mind a CO saying, "Gee, there aren't enough D4.5/T4.5 caches in my area. I think I'll design my next one to fit that hole." To me, at least, there's a difference between putting out caches to help with a challenge and putting out a series of caches to make a challenge trivial.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
19 minutes ago, dprovan said:

 I don't mind a CO saying, "Gee, there aren't enough D4.5/T4.5 caches in my area. I think I'll design my next one to fit that hole." To me, at least, there's a difference between putting out caches to help with a challenge and putting out a series of caches to make a challenge trivial.

 

I put a lot of effort into my 5/1 cache in my (now defunct) GeoArt.  The difficulty was in making it a truly 1 T!  Short distance form parking.  Wheelchair accessible.  And could be retrieved by a wheelchair geocacher.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
13 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

Then do the Original Fizzy Challenge: this one.

I've been sitting on 80 of 81 for almost five years. Still need that rare, old 5/3.5 and there are none near me.  I had hoped to qualify before I hit 1000 finds and came close.  Made the hike to The Secret Patio near Salt Lake City in May 2016 but ended up with a DNF due to there still being deep snow at GZ.  Haven't gotten back to Utah since.  I need to change that this year.

Link to post
On 2/18/2021 at 8:32 AM, Lynx Humble said:
On 2/18/2021 at 4:51 AM, fizzymagic said:

Then do the Original Fizzy Challenge: this one.

This kind of challenges is stupid it's almost impossible to qualify for it now because most of the qualifying cache are archived.

 

I wouldn't call it "stupid". I would call it, well, challenging. And it absolutely can encourage traveling and adventure since many of the older qualifying caches actually take some legitimate effort compared to modern DT equivalents. It's not a challenge you can complete in a short term. It's a goal. If you think it's "stupid", well, it can be ignored. :)

That style can no longer be placed since date limitations like that are no longer allowed. (which, btw, isn't confirmation that it's "stupid", but rather a shift in the goals of challenge-oriented geocaching from HQ to encourage more geocaching, remove un-qualifications, and provide a more level playing field for both new and veteran geocachers, with more widely reasonable goals).

  • Funny 1
Link to post
On 2/18/2021 at 12:30 PM, fizzymagic said:

I agree that it is a problem.  We have been trying to get Kealia to change it for years now. But it does seem to be what NYPaddleCacher would like! 

 

I have no idea how close I come to completing that one.  To be clear, my objection isn't about using finds to complete a challenge after a challenge has been posted.  It's about creating a  group of cache specifically so that they can be used to complete a challenge.  

 

Sure, it might help other cachers to create a D4.5/T4.5 cache if there are few in the area, but I also think it's a bit contrived to pick the rating you want a cache to have then place a cache with the attempt satisfy that criteria.   IMHO, there a  lot of cache are improperly rated (mostly 5/5s) because the CO wants to own a cache that rating rather than giving it an accurate rating based on where and how it's placed.   

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
2 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

IMHO, there a  lot of cache are improperly rated (mostly 5/5s) because the CO wants to own a cache that rating rather than giving it an accurate rating based on where and how it's placed. 

 

Absolutely, but that shouldn't be reason not to actually place a cache with a legitimate target DT, just because others do it incorrectly or for questionable motives :)

  • Funny 1
Link to post
19 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Absolutely, but that shouldn't be reason not to actually place a cache with a legitimate target DT, just because others do it incorrectly or for questionable motives :)

 

The point is, I wouldn't feel right using a cache with a contrived D/T rating to make a claim that I completed a challenge.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
2 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

The point is, I wouldn't feel right using a cache with a contrived D/T rating to make a claim that I completed a challenge.  

 

Same. I'd prefer to target a DT that looks legitimate. Thankfully we have the choice to be able to do that :)

Link to post
2 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Same. I'd prefer to target a DT that looks legitimate. Thankfully we have the choice to be able to do that :)

 

Choice implies there is also an equally valid option to choose a cache which does not have legitimate D/T ratings, but has ratings created specifically to complete a challenge.  I wouldn't choose to find a cache like that nor will I condone the practice of using invalid D/T ratings.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
23 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:
28 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Same. I'd prefer to target a DT that looks legitimate. Thankfully we have the choice to be able to do that :)

 

Choice implies there is also an equally valid option to choose a cache which does not have legitimate D/T ratings, but has ratings created specifically to complete a challenge.  I wouldn't choose to find a cache like that nor will I condone the practice of using invalid D/T ratings.

 

Well, yes, there is a choice and equally valid option to choose a cache which doesn't have a legitimate D/T rating. It's just statistics. So you can choose to, or you can choose not to. That doesn't you condone using invalid D/T ratings. I don't. But I would choose and prefer to find caches with legitimate ratings if I wanted to complete a challenge and say I did it legitimately. In other cases I might not care - I won't NOT find a cache just because I personally think the DT is illegitimate. But if it's for a challenge? My personal opinion of my completion will be determined on my opinion of how legitimate I think the necessary qualifications are for the caches I found.

And that's 100% entirely my choice.  This smacks of the FTF debate. Who cares. Explain the context of your achievement and only compare to others, if you really want to. I don't care if someone has 50 illegitimate fizzy grids and I have 10. That was their choice, this was mine.

 

So yeah, "there is also an equally valid option to choose a cache which does not have legitimate D/T ratings, but has ratings created specifically to complete a challenge." Because if they choose that, can still log the challenge complete. Doesn't make the DTs legitimate, but it does make the choice valid.

Link to post
4 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

If you think it's "stupid", well, it can be ignored. :)

That style can no longer be placed since date limitations like that are no longer allowed. (which, btw, isn't confirmation that it's "stupid", but rather a shift in the goals of challenge-oriented geocaching from HQ to encourage more geocaching, remove un-qualifications, and provide a more level playing field for both new and veteran geocachers, with more widely reasonable goals).

Reasonable goals? Leveling fields?????? Even with 14K founds I have to ignore most of Challenges in Ontario because they have been placed by a clique of hardcore gamer....

 

Two of multiple example including one with date limitation :

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, Lynx Humble said:

Two of multiple example including one with date limitation

You do remember what I said, yes?

 

6 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

That style can no longer be placed since date limitations like that are no longer allowed.

In reference to the California fizzy which limits by date found and date placed. Of all time.

 

1 hour ago, Lynx Humble said:

Reasonable goals? Leveling fields??????

Yes. "Reasonable" does not  mean "everyone can qualify easily". Reasonable is a term decided upon by region's reviewer team, for geocachers in that region.

"Leveling fields" as in if you've already found a qualifying cache, it can still qualify. You are not left out in the cold because there may no longer be any qualifying caches you haven't found. Level playing field.

 

1 hour ago, Lynx Humble said:

Even with 14K founds I have to ignore most of Challenges in Ontario because they have been placed by a clique of hardcore gamer....

Well that's your choice. I choose to look at the extreme ones as long-term goals to aim for. Perfectly reasonable. That's my choice. I even have a list for challenge caches I consider "hard" and may never qualify for. But hey, if I'm nearby, I'll find and sign it. Again, my choice.

 

I was in Nevada and saw some local challenge caches there. The EASY variant of one required something like a few 10's of thousands of finds. Because there, that was deemed reasonable by the reviewers given the region's makeup. That wouldn't fly here.  Chances are if you want to qualify for hard challenges in another region, you'll need to cache more in that region.

 

1 hour ago, Lynx Humble said:

Two of multiple example including one with date limitation

Yes. A different type of date parameter that was deemed allowable by Geocaching HQ for Challenge Caches. Not the same as the California Fizzy.

Edited by thebruce0
quote fix
Link to post
8 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Chances are if you want to qualify for hard challenges in another region, you'll need to cache more in that region.

Well in Ontario that doesn't seems to be true there are a lot of Challenge involving travelling far away OUTSIDE Ontario for example

GC8DTKV

 

I know the challenge guideline says there has to be a reasonable number of people that qualifies but if it's always the same group of 12 that travelled around the World multiple time that's can only log them it kill the fun for the others that don't have unlimited spending/time available for travels.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
37 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

Well in Ontario that doesn't seems to be true there are a lot of Challenge involving travelling far away OUTSIDE Ontario for example

GC8DTKV

I didn't say you couldn't post a challenge requiring travel somewhere else.

 

37 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

know the challenge guideline says there has to be a reasonable number of people that qualifies but if it's always the same group of 12

It's not always the same group of 12 who are used as qualifying geocachers. Have you asked the owners for the list of people who they submitted with the challenges?

 

This line of discussion is really irrelevant to the topic. Probably better posted or continued in a region category.

Link to post
On 2/22/2021 at 1:56 PM, Lynx Humble said:

Reasonable goals? Leveling fields?????? Even with 14K founds I have to ignore most of Challenges in Ontario because they have been placed by a clique of hardcore gamer....

 

Two of multiple example including one with date limitation :

The first one has me entirely confused.  Published 10/29/20, FTF on 10/04/20?  Bunch of logs in between?

 

I also didn't originally understand this ... "These 31 caches must also have been found in a different county."  Different than what?  Different than where I live?  Or do all 31 need to have been in different counties?  As it happens (per the checker), it's the latter.  To be sufficiently clear, the description should read  "Each of these 31 caches must also have been found in different counties." or something along those lines.

 

Interesting that it counts 'counties' in any country (e.g., 'Nürnberg (Germany)'.  That improved my score a bit.

 

 

 

Link to post
11 minutes ago, ecanderson said:

The first one has me entirely confused.  Published 10/29/20, FTF on 10/04/20?  Bunch of logs in between?

The cache was placed by the owner who was with a group. They all signed the log when it was placed as a pre-publish find. The logs (all but one of whom did not qualify as of their signings) were not posted until after the cache was published. Whether that 10/4/20 Found It log is a "true FTF" is a discussion for another thread. As is the analysis of the logging history on these caches.

 

11 minutes ago, ecanderson said:

"These 31 caches must also have been found in a different county."

Grammar? A critique like that should be directed to the CO rather than this thread. Yes, it was the latter - 31 different counties.

 

11 minutes ago, ecanderson said:

Interesting that it counts 'counties' in any country (e.g., 'Nürnberg (Germany)'.  That improved my score a bit.

That's a Project-GC thing and a challenge parameter. Counties can exist worldwide.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to post
On 2/22/2021 at 12:48 PM, thebruce0 said:

 

Well, yes, there is a choice and equally valid option to choose a cache which doesn't have a legitimate D/T rating. It's just statistics. So you can choose to, or you can choose not to. That doesn't you condone using invalid D/T ratings. I don't. But I would choose and prefer to find caches with legitimate ratings if I wanted to complete a challenge and say I did it legitimately. In other cases I might not care - I won't NOT find a cache just because I personally think the DT is illegitimate. But if it's for a challenge? My personal opinion of my completion will be determined on my opinion of how legitimate I think the necessary qualifications are for the caches I found.

And that's 100% entirely my choice.  This smacks of the FTF debate. Who cares. Explain the context of your achievement and only compare to others, if you really want to. I don't care if someone has 50 illegitimate fizzy grids and I have 10. That was their choice, this was mine.

 

So yeah, "there is also an equally valid option to choose a cache which does not have legitimate D/T ratings, but has ratings created specifically to complete a challenge." Because if they choose that, can still log the challenge complete. Doesn't make the DTs legitimate, but it does make the choice valid.

 

Okay, you're right.  You win.  Happy now?  

 

Now where did that goal post go?

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
On 2/25/2021 at 9:25 AM, thebruce0 said:

No goal posts have moved. Too bad you thought this was about "winning". But at least we can move on from that strand now.

 

I can show a specific example where you moved the goal post.  It's not worth the time it would take the time to type out a paragraph.

Link to post
7 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

I can show a specific example where you moved the goal post.

I disagree.

 

6 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

It's not worth the time

We agree.

 

 

Now, how about those D/T Matrix geocaches?

I think the question was answered in the 2nd comment in this thread. The OP hasn't returned for a response. Maybe this thread is now done?

Link to post
1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

Now, how about those D/T Matrix geocaches?

I think the question was answered in the 2nd comment in this thread. The OP hasn't returned for a response. Maybe this thread is now done?

 

I agree.  The thread has devolved into side debates that are best conducted through messages between people who care to do so.

 

So, I am moving the goalposts and declaring a TOUCHDOWN!  Closing this thread.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2
  • Surprised 1
Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...