Jump to content

Any stats sites?


CacheMonkeez

Recommended Posts

azgeocaching.com seems to have their states statistics. I just found that site on the 'leaderboard' thread on the geocaching.com Forum-board. Elias posted that they don't block sites like that. I'm not exactly sure what that means or how they get their stats.

 

I am assuming (and you know what that usually leads to) that the data is scraped. I may be wrong.

 

Other options involve pocket queries (not sure what the user license on those allow) or permission/access to the geocaching.com DB.

 

I am curious about the AZ site - I know people in our state have mentioned having a stats board for our state. I feel it would go along with a statement Jeremy made about allowing people to create and manage their own boards.

 

Anyways - Elias said they don't block them so that gives me hope icon_smile.gif

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by southdeltan:

http://www.azgeocaching.com seems to have their states statistics. I just found that site on the 'leaderboard' thread on the geocaching.com Forum-board. Elias posted that they don't block sites like that. I'm not exactly sure what that means or how they get their stats.

 

I am assuming (and you know what that usually leads to) that the data is scraped. I may be wrong.

 

Other options involve pocket queries (not sure what the user license on those allow) or permission/access to the geocaching.com DB.

 

I am curious about the AZ site - I know people in our state have mentioned having a stats board for our state. I feel it would go along with a statement Jeremy made about allowing people to create and manage their own boards.

 

Anyways - Elias said they don't block them so that gives me hope icon_smile.gif

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner


 

They do now. The admins of azgeocaching.com have been having problems for well over a week. The original IP was banned for reasons unknown (gc.com hasn't responded to their e-mail yet...1.5 weeks and counting), so they changed what they pulled to ONLY new caches. That IP was blocked a day later. Now nothing is being pulled, and I'm venturing to say it's the best stats site around for individual states. The Snaptek guys really know what they're doing. I just love the fact that all the schools they are in charge of run Linux servers and Linux on the classroom desktop computers.

 

I really wish something would be made public as to what is going on...since gc.com doesn't really care for stats, I enjoyed checking the azgeocaching.com stat page, because it gave me an extra sense of enjoyment in the sport to watch myself move up in the ranks, and being able to fend off some other cachers. I am somewhat competitive by nature, but I hardly obsess over it in geocaching. Now, if you talk to me about FPS games, that's an entirely different story. icon_biggrin.gif

 

Brian

Team A.I.

Link to comment

That's strange Brian - I was paraphrasing from the 'Geocaching.com should create a leaderboard thread' (on the Geocaching.com board). On the 3rd page the last two replies are:

 

quote:
Originally posted by Elias:

quote:
Originally posted by graldrich:

What I'd like to know is WHY geocaching com is blocking azgeocaching.com from getting statistics for the state of Arizona?


We don't block people/sites like this. If you're having connectivity problems, email me at admin at Groundspeak dot com and I'll be happy to investigate this for you.

 

frog.gif Elias


 

That's what I was basing my statement on.

 

I see that the UK site has disclaimers that it's official but I didn't notice them on the AZ site - perhaps that's it if it is banned?

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

Link to comment

GeocacheUK.com was officialy recognissed by GC.com several months ago, and due to the recent changes to the GC.com database has had to change the way data is obtained from them.As far as i am aware webscraper programs are now totaly blocked from accessing GC.com, I beleive Teasel uses Pocket Quiries to obtain the data now. For any more quiries try the forum on GeocacheUK.com, were the Cat or Teasel will be able to give more info. Mancunian Pyrocacher

 

I burn to cache!

Link to comment

Wouldnt it just be easier to do the stats on GC.com where the data is?

 

Seems really silly that since they have all the data there that they don't have the summary data published.

 

How hard can it be? I'd even be willing to lend my database skills to get it done. You would think that with all the cash they pull in they could at least add new functionality.

 

--

SpongeRob

rwmech@keenpeople.com

www.keenpeople.com

WPWU826

 

Cache'n Retrievers

crlogo.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by CWL:

Skydiver's Geocaching Point System


 

OK, that's cool! Making each cache worth an amount based on visitation is brilliant. Now if the ranking adjusted itself to when you started caching we'd be close to an actual comparison basis! (Regionally..)

 

(And even pastable html to show the caches rating on it's page...)

 

Jeremy should hire Skydiver for a new stats section,

 

Randy

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by RJFerret:

OK, that's cool! Making each cache worth an amount based on visitation is brilliant. Now if the ranking adjusted itself to when _you_ started caching we'd be close to an actual comparison basis! (Regionally..)

 

(And even pastable html to show the caches rating on it's page...)

 

Jeremy should hire Skydiver for a new stats section


 

Yea, I agree its a great idea for a stat page based on the visitation. I wish I knew how to start my own for my area.

 

64784_1200.gifBeen there... Done that...

Link to comment

The admins of azgeocaching.com were able to get the problem addressed. The IP address WAS blocked, but has since been corrected (just a little while ago). Everything should be up and running correctly again very soon.

 

I think a combination of skydiver's stats and the azgeocaching look/numbers would be cool too. It would be great to have an overall and a regional ranking by state, but that may be too resource intensive when all is said and done. Provided that each area's individual site (state specific) doesn't try to dump the entire site to pull the text data, I wouldn't foresee a problem.

 

Brian

Team A.I.

Link to comment

Of course it would be easier for gc.com to do it! Not sure how committed they are to doing this and therefore how long it will take (if ever).

 

quote:
Originally posted by SpongeRob:

Wouldnt it just be easier to do the stats on GC.com where the data is?

 

Seems really silly that since they have all the data there that they don't have the summary data published.

 

How hard can it be? I'd even be willing to lend my database skills to get it done. You would think that with all the cash they pull in they could at least add new functionality.


Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by RJFerret:

 

OK, _that's_ cool! Making each cache worth an amount based on visitation is brilliant. Now if the ranking adjusted itself to when _you_ started caching we'd be close to an actual comparison basis! (Regionally..)

 


 

The 'points based on visitation' rule does create a significant problem when you look at caches across a region. A geocache in Missoula will almost always be worth more points in Missoula than one in Coeur d'Alene, because there's more people hunting over that way. Even the more difficult caches in the Idaho panhandle tend to be worth less points due to the large number of folks trying, and finding, them.

 

Ron/yumitori

 

---

 

Remember what the dormouse said...

Link to comment

...all true, but as they say: It's better than nothing (which is what you get at gc.com)

 

quote:
Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:

I like the keenpeople stats, but since it is manual entry, you can enter any numbers you like. Since it is opt-in, you are only comparing yourself to others who have opted-in. When Dan's site was still around, I could keep an eye on other cachers in my area and see how active they were.

 

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness http://mywebpages.comcast.net/ihazeltine/bandbass.gif

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NM_Geo/http://www.keenpeople.com/stats/

 

mystats.php?userid=CacheMonkeez&vopt=&txtdata=Stats%20Rule!&bgcol=ffff99&fgcol=000066

Link to comment

quote:
I like the keenpeople stats, but since it is manual entry, you can enter any numbers you like. Since it is opt-in, you are only comparing yourself to others who have opted-in. When Dan's site was still around, I could keep an eye on other cachers in my area and see how active they were.

 

Remember this. You "Manually Enter" them on geocaching.com. Very few people will actually go out to check a logbook to verify your log entry. Opt-In is the only thing that's really fair to those that who do not wish to have any part in stats. The 300+ users now on the site are making the stats much more viable.

 

--

SpongeRob

rwmech@keenpeople.com

www.keenpeople.com

mystats.php?userid=rwmech&bgcol=ffffff&fgcol=0000ff

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by SpongeRob:

quote:
I like the keenpeople stats, but since it is manual entry, you can enter any numbers you like. Since it is opt-in, you are only comparing yourself to others who have opted-in. When Dan's site was still around, I could keep an eye on other cachers in my area and see how active they were.

 

Remember this. You "Manually Enter" them on geocaching.com. Very few people will actually go out to check a logbook to verify your log entry. Opt-In is the only thing that's really fair to those that who do not wish to have any part in stats. The 300+ users now on the site are making the stats much more viable.


I can check profiles of cachers in my area and see their find count. Is that still fair to them? Organizing the data on a site doesn't infringe on them any more than what I can do alone, except it takes a lot less time having a site that does it automatically.

 

I do like your site, SpongeRob, but I would prefer an all-inclusive list instead. It is nice being the #1 cacher in New Mexico, but I would rather that be because I have more finds here than anyone else, not because they don't have an account at keenpeople.com. The best idea I've heard is allow opting out of stats by having your name show up as anonymous on the list. That way, others know where they really rank in stats and you can choose not to display your name if you want it that way.

 

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness bandbass.gif

nm_button.gifmystats.php?userid=Team%20GPSaxophone&vopt=&txtdata=&bgcol=FFFFFF&fgcol=000000

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...
×
×
  • Create New...