Difficulty Ratings

[+Thot]

I’m new at this, but I have a suggestion.

 

There seems to be a lot of variability in how people rank the “Difficulty” factor. I suggest there be some kind of formula that takes in to account the percent of failures-to-find. I suspect many people don’t report failures, so when you see one reported there are probably several (many) more failures that weren’t reported. Being new I tend to go for the ones that are marked easy (one star) while I’m learning how to search for them. I don’t read the logs because I don’t want to run into spoilers, but I’ve started very quickly looking at the bottom of the page for purple faces.

 

This morning, while selecting a new cache, I did this and saw several. So, I went to the entire log listing for this one and saw many failures. I counted the finds and failures. There were 14 founds and 11 failures logged. Almost as many failures as founds and this cache is rated as easy (one star). Something’s wrong with this. One of the founds was a guy who lived nearby and had come back 5 times before finding it, and he had not recorded any of his failures. On caches that are truly easy I usually see no real failures. Sometimes they’ll have one or two with remarks like, “Too dark when we got there,” or something that says it wasn’t really a failed search. These 11 were all failed searches. A close reading of the logs suggest the coordinates are probably way off, but whatever the reason, it’s absurd to rate a cache with this ratio of failures as easy.

[AC Student]

Clayjar's Geocache Rating System works pretty well for establishing the initial rating. I agree that the rating should be adjusted if the cache proves to be much more difficult, or much easier, than the intial rating anticipated.

[+tirediron]

I think a lot of 'cache owners need to look at the logs posted for their 'caches and adjust their ratings as required. No shame in saying that your 'cache is easier/harder than you initially thought...

[+briansnat]

Below are the defs people are supposed to use. Yes they are somewhat subjective, which is why owner should follow the logs and adjust accordingly. A 1 star cache with several DNFs should adusted upward and a 3 star cache with no DNF's should be tweaked downward.

 

The only problem, as we've seen in other threads, is that a lot of people don't log DNF's which denies the owner the feedback needed to tweak his difficulty ratings.

 

* Easy. In plain sight or can be found in a few minutes of searching. 

** Average. The average cache hunter would be able to find this in less than 30 minutes of hunting. 

*** Challenging. An experienced cache hunter will find this challenging, and it could take up a good portion of an afternoon. 

**** Difficult. A real challenge for the experienced cache hunter - may require special skills or knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days / trips to complete. 

***** Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache. 

Edited July 5, 2004 by briansnat

[+Team GPSaxophone]

The only problem, as we've seen in other threads, is that a lot of people don't log DNF's which denies the owner the feedback needed to tweak his difficulty ratings.

Also, I've heard of people lowering the rating by a half star because they don't believe Clayjar's system is accurate.

[+briansnat]

Also, I've heard of people lowering the rating by a half star because they don't believe Clayjar's system is accurate

 

For terrain. The defs for difficulty are pretty cut and dried. You choose one. The terrain ratings are derived from several questions and often spit out something a bit different from the actual definiton. In NJ I usually tweak them down a tad. Tahosa, out in CO, says he often jacks them up a bit.

[+Torry]

I’m new at this, but I have a suggestion ...

 

A close reading of the logs suggest the coordinates are probably way off, but whatever the reason, it’s absurd to rate a cache with this ratio of failures as easy.

I think this is a common problem. If the co-ords are off and the hint isn't helpful then the finder has a lot of work ahead and a large area to search.

 

I've noticed some cachers get rather arrogant when presented with challenges to their posted co-ordinates. I tweaked mine on two of my caches after some more experienced folks with better equipment made some suggestions.

 

Perhaps a note to the cache owner about his feedback and some suggestions will help out. Just increasing the difficulty rating when there is bad info won't be much assistance when the finder shows up to track things down.

[+Renegade Knight]

I hid it with no problems...you should be able to find it.

 

The cache hide is much harder to pinpoint. Just because I think it's easy doesn't meet it really is. Personally the ones that nail me are rated 2 for the hide. A 4 doesn't make me even break a sweat normally.

 

The idea has merit but the question is how do you make such a system work? Obvously you have to start with a seed rating just to get the ball rolling. Ideally if rated accuraty the rating would remain constant over time.

[+Imajika]

You also need to take the cacher's ability into account. By this I mean, are they brand new cachers and don't know the sneaky hiding methods yet or are they seasoned cachers who have found quite a few?

 

One cache of mine seems to have no problems being found by people with a few cache finds under their belts. But the cachers that have 0-2 finds seem to always have a problem with it. They insist it is missing but then they come back later and find it right away.

 

I use Clayjar's rating method on all my caches and have rarely needed to tweak the levels. I can only think of one where I actually had the difficulty too high and lowered it by a star.

[+West Tn Dawg]

Then you have the cache that eats your lunch no matter what the rating is! I have found 55. Some were harder than others but found most with out TO much difficulty. HOWEVER, there is this one cache that I have looked for 4 times and still can't find it. Everytime I go hunt it I swear that it is gone. Then in a few days someone logs it "quick easy lunch time grab" and really ticks me off. The owner keeps sending e-mails and want give me any hints! At first I said I wouldn't look for it anymore, but everytime someone logs it as easy I have to try again. Now, I want give up and someday I will find this monster!

[+Torry]

Then you have the cache that eats your lunch no matter what the rating is! I have found 55. Some were harder than others but found most with out TO much difficulty. HOWEVER, there is this one cache that I have looked for 4 times and still can't find it. Everytime I go hunt it I swear that it is gone. Then in a few days someone logs it "quick easy lunch time grab" and really ticks me off. The owner keeps sending e-mails and want give me any hints! At first I said I wouldn't look for it anymore, but everytime someone logs it as easy I have to try again. Now, I want give up and someday I will find this monster!

Have you verified the co-ords in your GPS recently. I went to a cache twice with info I had loaded up when the cache was new. Turns out the owner had one number off but had corrected it later. I found it immediately after getting the right co-ords.