Jump to content

Another suggestion for the rating system.


Guest Havasu Desert Rat
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Guest Havasu Desert Rat

I was thinking today that it might be good to have a time factor included in the difficulty/terrain rating. Just for instance: I have one cache rated 4 1/2 stars terrain that takes me roughly 2 1/2 hours. I have in mind another cache that will have the same rating but will be a 6-8 hour hike. I'm sure you can fill in more examples. It would be nice to not only have an idea of what you are getting into, but also how much of it. The rating would have to assume good weather and route-finding. What do you think?

Link to comment
Guest PharoaH

quote:
Originally posted by Havasu Desert Rat:

It would be nice to not only have an idea of what you are getting into, but also how much of it.


I agree, but for some reason was under the assumption that distance was already a factor in the algorithm. There is definitely a difference between 1/2 a mile of 2-3 terrain and 2 miles of the same stuff!

 

As far as your 8 hour hike, it is by definition a terrain of 5 - special equipment required. What do I mean? That is a hike that would require an overnight stay before returning to the car.

Link to comment
Guest Havasu Desert Rat

I'm talking round trip figures. Both hikes are long enough and steep enough to rate the 4.5 stars. With the present system, you can get a 4.5 rating based on steepness and the fact that there isn't a trail. I could make a 20 minute 4.5 terrain. My point is that even with the same or similar terrain rating, there can be considerable difference in time required.

 

[This message has been edited by Havasu Desert Rat (edited 06 August 2001).]

Link to comment
Guest arffer

In the dim recesses of my mind, I recall a quotation something to the effect that "tough cases make for bad laws". The general idea is that when designing a system, shoot for the majority use. If you try and include all the exceptions and unique cases, it gets too unweildy. Diminishing returns probably comes into play also.

 

Yes, your 8 hour round trip cache hunt is a unique case that currently would result in an incorrect rating if you use the GCRS. But the GCRS is simply a tool. It is designed to handle the majority of cases. Take its results on your cache, and then adjust the numbers based on what your brain tells you if there are exceptional circumstances.

Link to comment
Guest Havasu Desert Rat

Come on guys, you're getting too specific on me here icon_smile.gif The example I presented was just that, an example. If it is such a unique example, tell me that and I'll find something else to talk about. I just figured that maybe this was an issue that other folks had run into and I was trying to offer a possible solution. I'd be surprised if any of you experienced seekers haven't run into caches rated the same that had very different time requirements.

Link to comment
Guest Havasu Desert Rat

Come on guys, you're getting too specific on me here icon_smile.gif The example I presented was just that, an example. If it is such a unique example, tell me that and I'll find something else to talk about. I just figured that maybe this was an issue that other folks had run into and I was trying to offer a possible solution. I'd be surprised if any of you experienced seekers haven't run into caches rated the same that had very different time requirements.

Link to comment
Guest brokenwing

At first I thought this sounded like a good idea. I like the idea of knowing what I'm getting into, afterall. Then I realized that time is very subjective. What takes you 2 1/2 hours, could easily take me 4. How would I know this based on your time listing? Also, what about time to find a cache? I have taken 3 hours to find a cache that was less than 10 minutes from my vehicle. Others seem to have completed this same cache in 15-20 minutes. Yes, this is an extreme example, but how do we account for it? For me, giving an approximate mileage listing in the notes is generally sufficient. I do appreciate trail conditions as well, when given.

 

Thanks,

brokenwing

Link to comment
Guest Markwell

Time may indeed be a factor, but I think that it's much more subjective than difficult/terrain are. I'm out of shape, but can plod along steadily for hours on end. Someone like MudBug65 ( icon_wink.gif) might be able to get to a cache in 45 minutes, but it might take me two hours. Add my kid and make it three. Add the wife and toddler, and it could take all day - with picnic and diaper breaks on the way. rolleyes.gif

 

However, if it does take a very long time to get to the cache in ideal conditions, I do think it would be nice to mention that on the cache page. Some will, some will not.

Link to comment
Guest PharoaH

be surprised if any of you experienced seekers haven't run into caches rated the same that had very different time requirements.


Been there, done that, even bought a bunch of T-shirts... Honestly, I really wish more folks would use the caclulator to re-rate their caches. If I go up a little further north into north georgia, tennesee, and the carolinas, it seems like some folks use the "Mountain Goat Rating System" icon6.gif It seems like only a mountain goat would rate some of these long hikes in the mountains as a 2.

Link to comment
Guest Markwell

Time may indeed be a factor, but I think that it's much more subjective than difficult/terrain are. I'm out of shape, but can plod along steadily for hours on end. Someone like MudBug65 ( icon_wink.gif) might be able to get to a cache in 45 minutes, but it might take me two hours. Add my kid and make it three. Add the wife and toddler, and it could take all day - with picnic and diaper breaks on the way. rolleyes.gif

 

However, if it does take a very long time to get to the cache in ideal conditions, I do think it would be nice to mention that on the cache page. Some will, some will not.

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...