Jump to content

Geocacher Rankings


King Pellinore
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Seen a couple of threads about find counts and rankings and so forth. I'm not so concerned with this sort of thing, but a lot of people are so I thought I'd mention it. Here's a proposal:

0-10 newbie;

10-50 beginner;

50-100 novice;

100-200 intermediate;

200-500 journeyman;

500-1000 explorer;

1000-2000 expert;

2000+ Master

 

terms can of course change and be added to as more people reach milestones. . .

 

King Pellinore

Link to comment

gee and I thought I was being conservative (but still getting me out of the beginner category icon_wink.gif but id' be game for brians! As to the difficulty, it really ought to be aconcern but I don't think there's a good way to measure/keep track of that. Anyone who gets over 2000 but skips the hard ones is still a formidable geocacher. . .

 

King Pellinore

Link to comment

I think it would be nice if the difficutly of a cache would be factored in, rather than shear numbers. I think you should get more points for scoring a cache that is say... underwater in a shark infested area that's surrounded by barbed wire and rusty nails, then a cache that one doesn't even have to get out of their car to bag. Or you could even have a difficulty average as a separate stat.

Link to comment

Hardly seems fair...

 

In some urban areas it seems like there are caches on every street corner. In my area most caches require a hike of several miles (usually UP HILL).

 

The numbers are senseless anyway. This isn't rocket science. After you've found a few dozen, I think you get it.

 

geospotter

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:

0-5 newbie;

6-15 beginner;

16-25 novice;

26-50 intermediate;

51-100 journeymen;

101-200 advanced;

201-500 expert;

501-1000 Master;

1001-2000 Grandmaster

2001+ Nutcase


 

With 45,000+ caches already hidden, aren't you setting the bar a little low? icon_wink.gif

 

How about:

 

0 - Troll (or pre-newbie if you wish)

1-100 - Newbie

100-500 - Newbie with attitude

500-1000 - Newbie with a serious addiction

1000-5000 - Newbie with experience

5K-10K - Newbie with honors

10K-20K - Beginner

20K-30K - Intermediate

30K-40K - Advanced Intermediate

>40K - Ok, you win and can stop looking.

 

Plus, with everyone under 10,000 finds still counted as a Newbie, it might help prevent some of the class warfare that pops up on the message boards! icon_razz.gif

 

Obviously the only true measure of a man (or woman) is a count of how many tupperware, 35mm film canisters, and ammo cans they've found in the woods! icon_biggrin.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by wimseyguy:

Will a number of forum posts ranking system be coming here soon too? icon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gif

 

These changes in latitudes, changes in attitudes;

Nothing remains quite the same.

Through all of the islands and all of the highlands,

If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane

 


 

These changes in latitudes, changes in attitudes;

Nothing remains quite the same.

Through all of the islands and all of the highlands,

If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane

Link to comment

I don't think it would be that much of a problem to make the ratings fields mean something ... for example, caches could easily be weighted by adding the difficulty and terrain ratings together and dividing by two.

 

A couple of other potential methods also come to mind, but it really wouldn't make much sense trying to implement such a system ... I find that more than half of the caches I visit have not been accurately rated, and some caches have been deliberately over/underrated.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by wimseyguy:

Will a number of forum posts ranking system be coming here soon too icon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gif?


 

Yes. We must all learn to ignore posts by people (excepting Admins. and other Lackeys) having more than twice the number of forum postings to cache finds + hides.

 

A review of my own record indicates that I will shortly be required to cease posting. Let the party begin! icon_wink.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

I don't think it would be that much of a problem to make the ratings fields mean something ... for example, caches could easily be weighted by adding the difficulty and terrain ratings together and dividing by two.

 

A couple of other potential methods also come to mind, but it really wouldn't make much sense trying to implement such a system ... I find that more than half of the caches I visit have not been accurately rated, and some caches have been deliberately over/underrated.


 

Although it could be abused, I think it would be interesting to have an optional rating system on caches when you make your find log (overall experience 1-5; difficuly 1-5; terrain 1-5) and then display the results on the cache page along with the hider's original rating. I'm sure this has been discussed before...

 

--Marky

"All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer with a backlit GPSr"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Marky:

 

Although it could be abused, I think it would be interesting to have an optional rating system on caches when you make your find log (overall experience 1-5; difficuly 1-5; terrain 1-5) and then display the results on the cache page along with the hider's original rating. I'm sure this has been discussed before...


 

It has been discussed ... but at that time I really didn't think it was necessary. (Of course, at that time it was also taboo to post corrected coordinates in a log or offer even the mildest of criticisms. Times do change.) I now think it's a pretty good idea.

Link to comment

Just count the stars (diffulculty & terrain) you have and paste/post them on your refrigerator. Don't tell anyone about them unless they ask.

I did 2 caches this past Saturday and enjoyed them both. Took about 4 hours, somebody else may have done 12 in 4 hours. But did they enjoy it?

It really depends on what you want out of this hobby. icon_rolleyes.gif

 

I have flouted the wild, I have followed its lure, fearless. familar, alone; yet the wild must win,

and a day will come when I shall be overthrown. By: Robert Service

Link to comment

quote:
Don't you love how people always assume you cache under the same usename you post to the forums.

 

I have never understood why anyone would cache under one username and post to the forums under another name.ashamed of what you say? icon_confused.gif

 

I'm a man and I can change if I have to,I guess.

Link to comment

Yes, I am fully aware I have yet to log a single find. On a bright note, my new Legend should be here by Thursday, looks like a busy weekend!icon_biggrin.gif On the topic of a rating system, IMHO, it is inappropriate. Ok, some of you have 2000+ caches, that's great. Some of us (Read: Me) will be lucky to find 20 a year. I spend typically 6-8 months a year out of the country, and the opportunity just is not there. As well, what about the younger 'cachers who are at the mercy of their parents to provide transport. Fewer finds does not mean that you are less skilled, or less entheusiatic. There is also the fact that some people live in areas where there are very few caches to find. Like Dusty said, this is a recreational activity. How about organizing competitions, and ranking the results of those? Personally, I cannot say that I like the idea of being 'labeled' just because I do not have the opportunity that others do.... My 2 1/2 cents worth.

Link to comment

For those of you who are taking this seriously, it's a joke....heellloo!

 

quote:
Yes. We must all learn to ignore posts by people (excepting Admins. and other Lackeys) having more than twice the number of forum postings to cache finds + hides.

 

Uh,oh what does it mean when you have an 18-1 post/find ratio? I don't have any person particular in mind...just asking.

 

"An appeaser is one who keeps feeding a crocodile-hoping it will eat him last" -Winston Churchill

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by tirediron:

Yes, I am fully aware I have yet to log a single find. On a bright note, my new Legend should be here by Thursday, looks like a busy weekend!icon_biggrin.gif On the topic of a rating system, IMHO, it is inappropriate. Ok, some of you have 2000+ caches, that's great. Some of us (Read: Me) will be lucky to find 20 a year. I spend typically 6-8 months a year out of the country, and the opportunity just is not there. As well, what about the younger 'cachers who are at the mercy of their parents to provide transport. Fewer finds does not mean that you are less skilled, or less entheusiatic. There is also the fact that some people live in areas where there are very few caches to find. Like Dusty said, this is a recreational activity. How about organizing competitions, and ranking the results of those? Personally, I cannot say that I like the idea of being 'labeled' just because I do not have the opportunity that others do.... My 2 1/2 cents worth.


 

And then there are the kids who have tons of finds because the parents drag them along but they never log.

 

Wherever you go there you are.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by tirediron:

Some of us (Read: Me) will be lucky to find 20 a year. I spend typically 6-8 months a year out of the country, and the opportunity just is not there.


 

Well, there are 162 countries with caches. If there isn't one in the country you're going to, hide one.

 

george

 

39570_500.jpg

Pedal until your legs cramp up and then pedal some more.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by georgeandmary:

Well, there are 162 countries with caches. If there isn't one in the country you're going to, hide one.


 

But less easy to practice. First there is the fact that I am wherever I am WORKING! And as I understand it, placing caches that you cannot maintain is not considered good form by some, and lastly, and most importantly, when you are in a foreign country, whose laws are often very different than your own, I am a little hesitant to go tramping around and hiding things.

Link to comment

I suppose it's human nature to make everything a contest. Who was it that said "the first horse race took place a half-second after the second person got on a horse", or something like that?

 

I like the numbers to see how I am doing (or how much time I can afford) compared to others.

 

But what I enjoy most is a little game I play with each cache. I study all available maps and look at things from all directions, and then I plot the quickest, shortest route to the cache possible. Of course I have to be sure I am parking legally and not tramping on private ground. I like to think it adds a little extra dimension (sometimes orienteering) to the game. It also just might help a little to keep the trodden pathways down. Of course I just started this passtime this Winter and I suspect this is the best season for this approach.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by juliamark:

I suppose it's human nature to make everything a contest.


 

I say we multiply the cache difficulty ratings by the weight and height of the cache finder. We big guys have a tougher time gaining elevation and sink deeper while slogging through swamps so it's only fair to adjust the terrain ratings! icon_razz.gif

 

Seriously (although it's tough to apply that word anywhere near this thread), Julia's right on the money - actually lending wisdom to this discussion!

 

p.s. I still think anyone with less than 10,000 finds should be classified a 'newbie'. (although I heard there's a special bonus of 2,000 finds being offered to anyone who can fix the pocketquery constipation problem!). icon_wink.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by HartClimbs:

 

I say we multiply the cache difficulty ratings by the weight and height of the cache finder. We big guys have a tougher time gaining elevation and sink deeper while slogging through swamps so it's only fair to adjust the terrain ratings!


 

What are you talking about? You big guys with the long legs can gain twice the elevation per stride as us short guys ... or did you mean "stout?" The stout guys should have an easier time in the swamps, because when they fall in they bob up to the surface and float like corks. (Or, if they get stuck in the muck, they will quickly be spotted by an animal rights activist who would immediately send out a "beached/stranded whale" alert.) icon_wink.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jacksons:

quote:
Don't you love how people always assume you cache under the same usename you post to the forums.

 

I have never understood why anyone would cache under one username and post to the forums under another name.ashamed of what you say?


 

Yeah, that's just stupid. Who'd do a thing like that anyway?

 

warm.gif

Link to comment

Greetings!

 

I jumped on here because I saw KING PELLINORE had posted - anybody who has been to his FLYING INSTRUMENTS ( my favorite PA cache ) knows he is crazy!!! :-)

 

I think that your FINDS need to be DIVIDED by the number of DAYS since you started caching.

 

For some people in the multiple thousands - the division equals MORE THAN ONE PER DAY.

 

Feed that into the geocaching computer and it hums and whistles and lights blink and it spits out a piece of paper saying: GET A LIFE!

 

Yes, most people who realize they are addicted go through an incredible spurt of cache-finding in the beginning of their addiction but if it continues month after month at this rate - to the exclusion of community service, common sense and even sleep - thats a psychosis....

 

IMHO

PULASKI icon_biggrin.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:

quote:
Originally posted by Jacksons:

quote:
Don't you love how people always assume you cache under the same usename you post to the forums.

 

I have never understood why anyone would cache under one username and post to the forums under another name.ashamed of what you say?


 

Yeah, that's just stupid. Who'd do a thing like that anyway?


icon_wink.gif

 

--Marky

"All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer with a backlit GPSr"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Pulaski:

Yes, most people who realize they are addicted go through an incredible spurt of cache-finding in the beginning of their addiction but if it continues month after month at this rate - to the exclusion of community service, common sense and even sleep - thats a psychosis....


I have no idea what you are talking about...

 

It's true that the only community service I do these days is trashing out... icon_wink.gif

 

--Marky

"All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer with a backlit GPSr"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Indiana Jeff:

Some people spend 6+ hours just to get to my Lost Ark cache and back...3 hours one way, uphill to the top of the mountain...that ain't no newbie, no matter how few caches they have done before trying that...


 

8 hours and 40 minutes and a 10 mile round trip if you take the long was in. But it was a great hike.

Link to comment

The rating system is only for personal satifaction. I use it to set goals for myself.

Too many of you take the numbers to seriously.

 

For some getting numbers is easy and for some it will be harder depending on the number around you.

 

And then there are those of us that just cache TOO MUCH. icon_biggrin.gif I mean get enough caching. icon_biggrin.gif

 

Team Sand Dollar

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Pulaski:...I think that your FINDS need to be DIVIDED by the number of DAYS since you started caching.

 

For some people in the multiple thousands - the division equals MORE THAN ONE PER DAY...


 

I don't think this computes. When many of us started caching, there were very few caches hidden. Back then, it was much harder to find several caches in a day. Today, practically wherever you live, there is a large selection of hidden caches.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by sbell111:

 

I don't think this computes. When many of us started caching, there were very few caches hidden. Back then, it was much harder to find several caches in a day. Today, practically wherever you live, there is a large selection of hidden caches.


 

I checked, and my ratio is actually slightly lower in these times of easy, plentiful caches than it was "back in the good old days when there were only a few caches and we had to hike 10 miles uphill in both directions."

Link to comment

Sometimes several days go by and I am finding everything I go for, I feel like a 'journeyman' level cacher. Other days, I get skunked and other people are finding the same caches on the same days I am out there and I feel like a 'newbie'.

 

For me, ranking is individual and personal, and not necessarily just about numbers. Someday I may get past this way of evaluating myself as a cacher, but I doubt it.

 

"Could be worse...could be raining"

Link to comment

On returning home, I checked the numbers and learned that during my first year of geocaching I averaged 1.6 finds per day.

 

During my second year of geocaching, it has decreased to just over 1 cache per day.

 

Overall, my average is 1.4 caches per day, which is exactly what my average was over the first 100 caches I found. I don't know if that's an indication of consistency or is merely an interesting coincidence, but it is factual.

Link to comment

Hmmm... I do about one cache every 4 days.

 

00-06 months, 1 find every 5 days.

06-12 months, 1 find every 7 days.

12-18 months, 1 find every 3 days.

18-24 months, 1 find every 3 days.

 

Year 1: 1 find every 6 days

Year 2: 1 find every 3 days

 

My highest activity period was between 2/17/2003 - 3/16/2003, where I found 34 caches, an average of 1.26 caches per day, or 1 find every 0.79 days.

 

I have >2000 posts, that makes close to 12 posts per find. icon_wink.gif

 

Markwell

Chicago Geocaching

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 0
×
×
  • Create New...