Jump to content

Direction Of Sport...


Recommended Posts

While I would love to point to this as another example of lame caches killing the game like Johnny (and I generally DO agree with the sentiment), once I saw who the hider is I'm afraid I have a hard time taking things at face-value.

From what I've seen in the forums over the years, the "solo" part of his nick is well earned. He might hide great caches, but he doesn't seem to play well with others. Hiding caches just isnt really a solo activity. Your cache hides are constantly interacting with other people in your behalf.

I would guess there is a lot more coming into play here (like his many conflicts with TPTB and the admins here) then just local cache quality.

Too bad, no matter what the reason, I hate to see a cache like that go.

Link to comment
The hider felt that there was too many micros so he archived his regular-sized cache? My, that's an interesting bit of logic. I suspect that there is something else going on.

 

Everyone else won't play the way he wants, so he's taking his toys and going home. :(

I removed the cache, because there was no activity. I had been out there to maintain the cache more often than any cachers. I owned a GPS before Geocaching was invented. I enjoy hiking and backpacking. I was expressing frustration that the current trend has obsoleted caches that take you off the highway.

Link to comment
... It's sad. I'm not laughing. I can forsee the day that I will lose interest and quit hiding also. When the micro bombers hit my hometown a la Nashville, it will be time to go.

 

Frankly, I don't buy that urban micros are killing the game. If I want to go take a hike and find a cache, I can. If I choose to go after an easy micro, I can do that too.

 

Enjoy it while you still can.

I'm not buying it. The caches are out there. If you want to take a hike and find a cache, you can. If you think there are too few of the kind you like hide some more and get your friends involved.

 

I think it's funny that you hold up the Nashville area as the land of micros. While its true that there are plenty here, there are also planty of regular caches requiring a hike. Micros have not killed them off.

 

I also am not going to get depressed if a cacher decides to quit because not enough people are going after his caches. I have two mystery-multis that get very few visitors. The people who have found them seem to have liked them, so I'm happy.

Link to comment
I removed the cache, because there was no activity.  I had been out there to maintain the cache more often than any cachers.

Its no secret that caches requiring a hike get less visitors than other easier caches. However, pulling yours just makes it harder for those who like this kind of cache to go after one.

I owned a GPS before Geocaching was invented.  I enjoy hiking and backpacking.

That's great, but what's it got to do with anything?

I was expressing frustration that the current trend has obsoleted caches that take you off the highway.

I get what your saying, but I don't see how caches that do not require a hike preclude those that do.

 

My question for you is this, 'Are there caches in your area that you would like to go after?' I don't understand why the answer would be no, since there are at least two cachers in your area who like caches that require a hike.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
Its no secret that caches requiring a hike get less visitors than other easier caches.  However, pulling yours just makes it harder for those who like this kind of cache to go after one.

 

At one time nearly all of them required a hike.

 

My question for you is this, 'Are there caches in your area that you would like to go after?'  I don't understand why the answer would be no, since there are at least two cachers in your area who like caches that require a hike.

 

Not really. I am not that interested in caching anything at present. After several years very few things are as interesting as they were in the beginning.

Link to comment
In our area, Cola SC, there are many new micros, but they are evil evil evil. Very few easy bags here. For some reason folks here are putting in the effort to make good hides. Puzzle, Literary and Good multis make up a large percentage of the new hides in these parts. And it's amazing that the Dollar store has anything left when you see the good quality swag in the new hides. So.... In some areas geocaching is better than ever.

congratulations tands in SC. although we are new to the geocache sport, i think the hides will get better and better. We have not hiden one yet but if we want to make it a worthy adventure we will need to do our homework first. now i am going out in search of another cache.

Link to comment
I don't think it's funny. You just don't get it do you.

 

... The old school geocachers are disappearing and they won't be coming back. The significant hikers aren't going to give this site a second look after they type in their home zip and see that this game is hide-and-seek in parking lots and "find number xx out of yy caches today".

Enough with the Doom & Gloom. Being involved in the GPS market, I can tell you that the market is alive and well. The reason GPSs have come down in price so much is that the volume has gone up so much. There are many more people with GPSs now than ever before. Along with that, new types of people are coming into the market. Thus, you have new pockets of interest.

 

This is not necessarily bad for the game. It can mean a new infusion of life into the game, but much of that depends on how these people are introduced into it. It takes someone ten minutes to grab a buddy and show him a micro. It takes hours to hike out to a remote location.

 

In my opinion, the game only dies if the foundation (you old cachers) walk out from under it.

Link to comment
...In my opinion, the game only dies if the foundation (you old cachers) walk out from under it.

I disagree. I see this game more as self-perpetuating.

 

On several occasions, I've seen caches (and cachers) go away. A year or so later, a new cacher places a cache in nearly the same place.

Link to comment

OK, time to toss out a couple pennies....

 

I would agree that in the last few years there have been a lot of folks joining this game that won't do a level 3 or 4 cache. Although rare, a few of those have got into good enough shape to where they are willing to try a mile hike or so, but many still enjoy running around the city. I still enjoy the game, most folks still enjoy it, it still serves it's purpose... and that is to get folks away from the TV set. Some may be upset because there aren't enough long hikes, others are upset because there are too many long hikes.

 

Now we have ignore lists. My recommendation is to put them to good use so you can focus on the types of caches that you enjoy.

 

Edit: typo.

Edited by Moose Mob
Link to comment
Well, there you go.

Exactly.

While my original guess may have been off slightly, the point stands.

This cache being archived had nothing to do with micros. If we had had all the information about the situation to begin with, that would have been evident.

What was obvious to me and others was that the quote just didn't make sense, hence my suspicion that it was made up. If I had known other details, I would have understood that it was just a disenchanted wacko blaming his loss of interest on someone else.

Link to comment
Well, there you go.

Exactly.

While my original guess may have been off slightly, the point stands.

This cache being archived had nothing to do with micros. If we had had all the information about the situation to begin with, that would have been evident.

What was obvious to me and others was that the quote just didn't make sense, hence my suspicion that it was made up. If I had known other details, I would have understood that it was just a disenchanted wacko blaming his loss of interest on someone else.

Well it had something to do with micros. No one takes the time to place or search for regular caches off the beaten path.

Link to comment
OK, time to toss out a couple pennies....

 

I would agree that in the last few years there have been a lot of folks joining this game that won't do a level 3 or 4 cache.  Although rare, a few of those have got into good enough shape to where they are willing to try a mile hike or so, but many still enjoy running around the city.  I still enjoy the game, most folks still enjoy it, it still serves it's purpose... and that is to get folks away from the TV set.  Some may be upset because there aren't enough long hikes, others are upset because there are too many long hikes. 

 

Now we have ignore lists.  My recommendation is to put them to good use so you can focus on the types of caches that you enjoy.

 

Edit: typo.

I'll see your pennies and make it a full $.05 MM. I might be one of those folks you are referring to, I might not be. Before I began caching, a walk in the woods was usually on the right side of the fairway after a sliced drive. :( Since I have discovered this wonderful activity, I'm out on trails, greenways, and woods I never would have explored before. I'm neither a hardcore outdoorsman, nor a total couch potato, but somewhere in between. I'm somewhat active, but a bit out of shape too. I used to be in pretty good shape, and even played varsity lacrosse in college and several years after; but have allowed sloth and work demands to interfere too much lately. I do manage a weeklong skiing vacation every year, and try to get out on some extreme white water rafting at least once each fall. Other than that caching is about all the exercise I'm getting. In fact my doctor told me to try and get out 2-3x a week. Really; I got a note too! :(

 

I'm not afraid to push myself to go places and do things to find a cache, that I might not do if one wasn't there. I've found several 5/5's, done 8+miles of trail hiking on three consecutive Sundays to complete two very complex multis.

I've also spent 12+ driving around in a rented van fueled with Krispy Kreme and White Castle finding over 100 caches in a day and almost 300 in a weekend! ;)

 

So I guess I have become an extreme cacher, if not an extreme outdoorsman.

I hope to have a chance to visit some of the serious hiking caches I have read about in the forums someday soon, and would prepare myself accordingly.

I guess I just need a good goal for motivation these days. Most importantly, I have made some valuable friendships with like minded souls. ;)

 

If someone is so dissatisfied with the direction of the game that he takes his toys and goes home, the root of the problem is internal, not external. So what if his cache isn't being found as much as he would like. I think the evolution of the game is mostly OK just as it is; more of everything for everyone who is signing on for the adventures. (Now if we could only get that forum ingnore feature.... ;) )

Link to comment
I'll see your pennies and make it a full $.05 MM. I might be one of those folks you are referring to, I might not be. Before I began caching, a walk in the woods was usually on the right side of the fairway after a sliced drive. :( Since I have discovered this wonderful activity, I'm out on trails, greenways, and woods I never would have explored before. I'm neither a hardcore outdoorsman, nor a total couch potato, but somewhere in between. I'm somewhat active, but a bit out of shape too. I used to be in pretty good shape, and even played varsity lacrosse in college and several years after; but have allowed sloth and work demands to interfere too much lately. I do manage a weeklong skiing vacation every year, and try to get out on some extreme white water rafting at least once each fall. Other than that caching is about all the exercise I'm getting. In fact my doctor told me to try and get out 2-3x a week. Really; I got a note too! :(

 

I'm not afraid to push myself to go places and do things to find a cache, that I might not do if one wasn't there. I've found several 5/5's, done 8+miles of trail hiking on three consecutive Sundays to complete two very complex multis.

I've also spent 12+ driving around in a rented van fueled with Krispy Kreme and White Castle finding over 100 caches in a day and almost 300 in a weekend! ;)

 

So I guess I have become an extreme cacher, if not an extreme outdoorsman.

I hope to have a chance to visit some of the serious hiking caches I have read about in the forums someday soon, and would prepare myself accordingly.

I guess I just need a good goal for motivation these days. Most importantly, I have made some valuable friendships with like minded souls. ;)

 

If someone is so dissatisfied with the direction of the game that he takes his toys and goes home, the root of the problem is internal, not external. So what if his cache isn't being found as much as he would like. I think the evolution of the game is mostly OK just as it is; more of everything for everyone who is signing on for the adventures. (Now if we could only get that forum ingnore feature.... ;) )

:D It sounds like you are having a blast! :D (Glad to hear more positive stuff from the forums.)

Link to comment
Well, there you go.

Exactly.

While my original guess may have been off slightly, the point stands.

This cache being archived had nothing to do with micros. If we had had all the information about the situation to begin with, that would have been evident.

What was obvious to me and others was that the quote just didn't make sense, hence my suspicion that it was made up. If I had known other details, I would have understood that it was just a disenchanted wacko blaming his loss of interest on someone else.

Well it had something to do with micros. No one takes the time to place or search for regular caches off the beaten path.

You may find most of the caches at http://www.terracaching.com to be more to your liking. The original rating system is even setup to describe altitude changes because "off the beaten path" long range hikes leading to medium-sized caches were part of the founding of the site.

Link to comment

Interesting topic.

 

The way I see it, if you have a 1/1 in town, and a 1/1 half hour outside of town, the one in town will get 10 times the amount of logs that the one outside of town will get. On top of that, make the one outside of town a 1/5, and your number of visitors will drastically decrease. That is just human nature. What people should be doing is placing those 4-5 star terrain caches anyway and being content to wait for the very few who find them and rave about them. If you place it, someone will come. If you want high numbers of people to find your cache, then place a 1/1 in town.

 

There is a lot of talk about the old cachers, the ones who were more into hiking to caches. This sport has evolved so that there are other types of people here now. There is no reason why the athletic hikers cant co-exist with the couch potato families and the physically limited cachers.

 

This is just my point of view, from someone who cant physically do much more than a 1.5 star terrain.

Link to comment

 

There is a lot of talk about the old cachers, the ones who were more into hiking to caches. This sport has evolved so that there are other types of people here now. There is no reason why the athletic hikers cant co-exist with the couch potato families and the physically limited cachers.

 

This is just my point of view, from someone who cant physically do much more than a 1.5 star terrain.

I spent about 5 hours doing my first 2 caches. Driving about 30 miles to the trailhead.

WHY?, because they were the closest caches to me.

It didn't matter what they were, it was just a kick to get out and do them.

Now I mainly do 1/1s its a lot easier on these old knees. :(

Link to comment

 

There is a lot of talk about the old cachers, the ones who were more into hiking to caches. This sport has evolved so that there are other types of people here now. There is no reason why the athletic hikers cant co-exist with the couch potato families and the physically limited cachers.

 

This is just my point of view, from someone who cant physically do much more than a 1.5 star terrain.

I spent about 5 hours doing my first 2 caches. Driving about 30 miles to the trailhead.

WHY?, because they were the closest caches to me.

It didn't matter what they were, it was just a kick to get out and do them.

Now I mainly do 1/1s its a lot easier on these old knees. :(

I hear you there!

 

I developed shin splints in boot camp, and they normally don't bother me. I can hike a 6-7 mile groomed trail with no ill effects. A T4 in rocky terrain and poor trails will remind me of them shin splints for about a month or two. I don't want to sit in front of the TV for that long, so the T1 and T2 caches will fill that void. If I don't do more than 3 or 4 T3 caches in a weekend, I do just fine also.

 

Those walmart micros have a purpose. They may not meet aeveryones needs or desires, but they are there.

 

One has to remember, the very first cache was pretty close to the asphalt. Out of town, yes, but not a long hike at all.

Link to comment
Those walmart micros have a purpose. They may not meet aeveryones needs or desires, but they are there.

 

One has to remember, the very first cache was pretty close to the asphalt. Out of town, yes, but not a long hike at all.

Another thing to think about is many times those Walmart caches get someone started. I know in my case I'm not in great shape and I'm definitely among the older crowd and the in town micros got me out of the house and moving. The longer I do this the better shape I get in the more of the 2.5 to 3.5T caches I'm able to do. I can hike a mile or two on fairly level terrain with little problem but make that uphill or very rocky unstable terrain and I'm done. As one's age advances falls become much more serious and in many cases balance isn't what it once was either. I also have to say that since I began caching my mental alertness has risen and this year there has been no winter blues. I'm having a wonderful time with wonderful people.

Link to comment

The OP’s topic was “Direction of Sport…” I didn’t take that as a reason to restart the micro/lame cache debate. The “Direction of Sport” is much like a democracy, cache finds and cache placements are votes. In my area, physically easy, urban/suburban micro caches win! I think the debate should center around what this means for the future of geocaching and Geocaching.com (two separate entities).

Link to comment

When I started this game, all I knew was that someone had hid something, it was out there, and I was going to find it.

 

Way too cool.

 

It took time before I even had a concept of lampost micros, destination caches, cache days and variations that a lot of jaded old timers talk about. Preferences come from people growing and learning within the RASH that geocaching is. It happens to every one in any hobby they care to participate in. At the most fundamental level, people still hide things, it's still out there, and other are going to dang well find it.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment
The OP’s topic was “Direction of Sport…” I didn’t take that as a reason to restart the micro/lame cache debate. The “Direction of Sport” is much like a democracy, cache finds and cache placements are votes. In my area, physically easy, urban/suburban micro caches win! I think the debate should center around what this means for the future of geocaching and Geocaching.com (two separate entities).

It's hard to seperate the "lame micro" debate and the direction of the sport when one of the arguements about the direction of the sport is that it is headed towards lame micros. Based on that, I am not sure we are that far off topic.

 

The OP posted an exerpt from a log that refered to a cacher pulled a traditional cache because there were too many micros out there. The implication was that this is the direction of the entire sport. I believe it was stated many times that this was more of an expception than a rule, and also that the person actually pulled the cache due to it's inactivity.

 

So, back to the question at hand... what is the direction of the sport. To answer the wuestion of where it is going, we must first realize where it was, and where it started. Caching did not start with long hikes in the mountains. It started with a 5 gallon bucket near a back road. The next step of the evolution were the hikers, who had GPS units and would place caches a little further out. Then, as GPS's got more popular with non-hikers, the next phase was to have more caches closer to tow,n and then micros in town.

 

So, the direction of geocaching is that it has been evolving to meet the needs of more and more different types of people. Because of the different types of people, there becomes differencs of opinion. Micro versus traditional. Power trails versus multi's. Locationless and virtuals also cause debates also. Debates are good. Debates can help us learn more about each other, if we let them.

 

Some may take thier toys and go home, but overall, the general direction of geocaching is that it is catering to more and more people.

 

What's the next phase in the evolution? It might just be headed for world domination, one tupperware container at a time.

 

<* Steps off soap box *>

Link to comment
This cacher may well have been really upset about the trend in his/her area and has given up on the game.

 

I think that is what the 'taking his toys and going home' comment was intended to convey. Two different ways of saying the same thing.

 

If I was going to pick at the essential differences between the two, I'd say that your version is less inflammatory and focuses on the specific situation. The nominal flamer's version focuses on how such a reaction fits into the general types of behaviours we hairless apes tend to display.

Link to comment
One has to remember, the very first cache was pretty close to the asphalt. Out of town, yes, but not a long hike at all.

One can't help but notice that there are a lot of people posting to this thread who have no concept of what this game was like a few years ago. One can't help but think that they have precious little perspective on the direction of this game.

Link to comment
One has to remember, the very first cache was pretty close to the asphalt.  Out of town, yes, but not a long hike at all.

One can't help but notice that there are a lot of people posting to this thread who have no concept of what this game was like a few years ago. One can't help but think that they have precious little perspective on the direction of this game.

By all means, please DO enlighten.

Link to comment
One can't help but think that they have precious little perspective on the direction of this game.

I just crunched a few numbers. I have a library of caches I've been collecting ever since I could collect them. It includes a serious chunk of the south east centered around South Carolina, contains over 5000 caches, and includes many of the earliest caches placed in the area--the earliest being placed 7/17/00. In my PQs I include all sizes of caches and only filter out the event types and webcams.

 

Sorting by placed date, I had to count 196 before I got to the first micro. The next 5 pages yielded 16 micros out of a total of 165 caches for 9.6% of the placements.

 

Starting from the most recent placements I count 67 micros for 40.6% of the placements and 28 small for 17% of the placements. Total caches placed small or smaller is well over half.

 

While without actually breaking out those caches into urban and rural you can infer in a general manner from the size of the caches that most of the newer caches are urban and folks are getting away from the "traditional" cache.

 

Also, I must point out this sampling is from an area that includes many different areas with differing styles including an area with very few micros to an area where the locals don't mind micros in the woods.

 

However, even though the numbers for geocaching as whole will be off, it certainly shows the direction the games is heading. It's ironic that TPTB are so worried about the perceptions of the state and federal park systems, yet the game is becoming more and more urban. (I wonder if the two are related.)

 

I'm sure anyone who has a historical library such as mine will come to the same conclusions.

Link to comment

Interesting analysis, but I don't know what you can safely infer from it. You gave no results based on time, so we cannot see whether there has been any real skew. Also, you did not say whether any one type is 'taking over'. I don't care if there are 5000 easy micros on my block, if I can still take a hike and find a cache, they aren't taking over and there is nothing to be alarmed about.

Link to comment
Interesting analysis, but I don't know what you can safely infer from it. You gave no results based on time, so we cannot see whether there has been any real skew. Also, you did not say whether any one type is 'taking over'. I don't care if there are 5000 easy micros on my block, if I can still take a hike and find a cache, they aren't taking over and there is nothing to be alarmed about.

Now here's a classic example of why I rarely read sbell111's posts much less respond to them.

 

First, I already made clear this is already pretty much an historical sampling of my stomping grounds. Obviously, caches already archived before any one PQ ran would not be included. The exception to this is the ones we've found as I've gone back and added them manually. Considering I can see no reason why a larger number of micros would be archived over any other size I don't see how the archived caches can change conclusion. So, it's a fairly accurate representation of the area covered.

 

Secondly, considering the non-linear growth of the number of placements over time the time element is irrelevant. It's the percentage of all caches placed in a certain sampling size. I'm sure I could have used a precentage of caches over a time period and gotten pretty close to the same results.

 

Thirdly, I didn't mention any type taking over because that wasn't the point of my post. I was speaking to the perception of recent trends and showing some data that supports that perception.

 

Additionally, the last statement is so far out in left field...

 

Anyway, my points stands. The quoted post does nothing to refute it.

Link to comment
Now here's a classic example of why I rarely read sbell111's posts much less respond to them....

OK, let's take a look at this thread and your post. The premise of this thread is that 'the splattering of micros all over creation' affects traditionals.

 

Your post basically said that in the area that you live, there's a bunch of caches. On first read, it appeared that you were attempting to use this data to support the argument of the OP. Your response to my post would make one think that that was not your intention.

 

Why don't you break it down for everyone, then. What was your point? :)

Link to comment
One can't help but think that they have precious little perspective on the direction of this game.

I just crunched a few numbers. I have a library of caches I've been collecting ever since I could collect them. It includes a serious chunk of the south east centered around South Carolina, contains over 5000 caches, and includes many of the earliest caches placed in the area--the earliest being placed 7/17/00. In my PQs I include all sizes of caches and only filter out the event types and webcams.

 

Sorting by placed date, I had to count 196 before I got to the first micro. The next 5 pages yielded 16 micros out of a total of 165 caches for 9.6% of the placements.

 

Starting from the most recent placements I count 67 micros for 40.6% of the placements and 28 small for 17% of the placements. Total caches placed small or smaller is well over half.

 

While without actually breaking out those caches into urban and rural you can infer in a general manner from the size of the caches that most of the newer caches are urban and folks are getting away from the "traditional" cache.

 

Also, I must point out this sampling is from an area that includes many different areas with differing styles including an area with very few micros to an area where the locals don't mind micros in the woods.

 

However, even though the numbers for geocaching as whole will be off, it certainly shows the direction the games is heading. It's ironic that TPTB are so worried about the perceptions of the state and federal park systems, yet the game is becoming more and more urban. (I wonder if the two are related.)

 

I'm sure anyone who has a historical library such as mine will come to the same conclusions.

I don't have time right now (rather go out there and find some caches), but it might be interesting to revisit this thread from 3 months ago and recrunch some numbers to see if there are any trends even in that short time-trame.

Link to comment
One can't help but notice that there are a lot of people posting to this thread who have no concept of what this game was like a few years  ago.  One can't help but think that they have precious little perspective on the direction of this game.

 

One can't help but notice that there are some "old timers" that still refuse to see other points of view about this "Sport". It's their way or no way. I've been geocaching for well over two years myself and welcome the changes. I may prefer some of the hiking caches myself but the cache & dash finds are fun in their own way. But some cachers will never see it this way. That's just the way it is.

 

As far as I'm concerned, bring on all caches. I'll look for them all. It wasn't that long ago when I had found every cache within 50 miles of my home. You can't do that if you only look for the easy ones. Thanks to the growing number of cachers in my area, I now have over 80 caches to find in that same radius and I love it. Bring them on!

 

Btw, if someone would place a new cache somewhere near where this archived cache was placed, I'll bet it would soon be found many times. The subject cache was placed back in 2003 and was probably already found by most of the local cachers.

Link to comment
One has to remember, the very first cache was pretty close to the asphalt.  Out of town, yes, but not a long hike at all.

One can't help but notice that there are a lot of people posting to this thread who have no concept of what this game was like a few years ago. One can't help but think that they have precious little perspective on the direction of this game.

Not all are that new. Some have been involved for a number of years.

 

The activity has grown, yes. Changed, yes and no.

It appears that more has been added instead of changing very much of what was there when you and I first started.

 

I looked at the logs of the cache that was quoted. I see it as sour grapes. It reminds me of a very early cacher that got upset with the Planet of the Apes thing happened. He didn't archive his caches, he deleted all the logs, changed the coords and name, remove the description.

 

I've got at least one cache that's easier to get to that's have about the same number of finds and has been there longer. I'm not worried about it. As far as I'm concerned it doing just fine.

 

Let's take a slightly different looks at trends. I have a cache that was place July 7, 2001. Finds;

Year 1 -- 16

Year 2 -- 22

Year 3 -- 17

Year 4 -- 13 (not a complete year yet.

 

During that period there have been a lot more caches placed. This place is a long ways from any city, and the number of possible hunts has gone up quite a bit since it was placed. I don't see any negative trend.

Link to comment
I would agree that more suburban micros are planted every day than traditional's on a nice hike.... but as far as the game is being ruined?

That depends entirely on your point of view.

 

This thread is discussing the direction of geocaching which I believe to be moving away from the "long-hikes" genre of geocaches and toward the "urban micro" type. This is my perception. I could crunch the numbers like CR did but I'm not going to bother because I'm quite sure that I would get the same sort of result. It seems to be less and less about location, location, location, and more and more abount numbers, numbers, numbers. Some will like this trend. Some not. The people who will hunt anything, won't care one way or another.

 

Is the game being ruined? Like I said, that depends on your point of view.

Link to comment
I don't have time right now (rather go out there and find some caches), but it might be interesting to revisit this thread from 3 months ago and recrunch some numbers to see if there are any trends even in that short time-trame.

What might be interesting (and time consuming) is a break-down of the precentage of the micros placed per given month. Considering the first micro that pops up in my library was in Jan '02 the first, what, 17 months would be 0%.

 

For February '05: Micros - 48.5% Regulars - 32%

For January '05: Micros - 45.6% Regulars - 36%

For December '04: Micros - 39.7% Regulars - 31%

For November '04: Micros - 54% Regulars - 28%

For October '04: Micros - 52% Regulars - 30%

For September '04: Micros - 54.4% Regulars - 37% (When "small" size came into existence?)

 

A sampling of the past 6 months shows you need a larger sampling to see a trend considering the values shown. How long did it take to ramp up the precentage of micro placements? That's not to mention the small size coming into existance muddies the study. It is interesting that 3 of those 6 months show that caches listed as micro out numbered all other cache placements combined. Even averaging the last 6 months together ~49% of the placements are listed as micro while only ~32% are listed as regular.

 

Considering it's becoming more rare to find a trading micro, these thrends show that in the not-too-distant future the cache most people think of first when talking about geocaching--a regular-sized traditonal--will become the minority.

 

I'm sure in many places it already has.

Link to comment

I said that I wouldn't bother to crunch the numbers but I did anyway. My data is a collection of caches located within 100 miles of my home in Southwestern Pennsylvania. I'll offer results based on time to appease sbell.

 

Cumulative totals thru:

 

2001: (1%) 1 micro, 93 total caches

2002: (3%) 10 micros, 299 total caches

2003: (10%) 62 micros, 645 total caches

2004: (19%) 234 micros, 1236 total caches

2005: (23%) 317 micros, 1385 total caches

 

I think that 23% is a low number relative to most areas. I'll consider myself lucky. I see, however, that the trend toward micros is accellerating. This same data reveals that 83 out of 149 (55%) of the caches placed so far this year were micros. Admittedly this number may be skewed somewhat due to the weather but I'm definitely seeing a trend. The writing is on the wall.

Link to comment
... I'll offer results based on time to appease sbell. ...

I don't feel appeased, but lets look at your numbers. :) I agree that your numbers might be a little low, so lets double the percentage of micros.

 

Based on your numbers with micros doubled, this leaves the total number of non-micros to be 91 in 2001, 279 in 2002, 521 in 2003, 768, in 2004 and 751 to date in 2005.

 

It sounds like the game is good and healthy in your area.

Link to comment

I'm not sure how you did your math but you definitely got that last figure wrong. You were probably confused by my cumulative totals which are confusing. I did that because it was convenient rather than taking it a step further to show the true year by year totals. Those would work out to be:

 

2001: (1%) 1 micro, 93 total caches

2002: (4%) 9 micros, 206 total caches

2003: (15%) 52 micros, 346 total caches

2004: (29%) 172 micros, 591 total caches

2005: (56%) 83 micros, 149 total caches

 

Healthy? Like I said before, it depends on your perspective.

Link to comment

I'm not a big micro fan -- but I'm also not into the numbers and am what I would call a cache-when-convenient player of this game. So.... I just filter out micros and only search for traditionals and have a happy time.

 

One thought I has was: will Groundspeak ever allow for micros and traditionals to exist in the same radius? It seems that the biggest argument I have seen on Micros is that they block the placement of a traditional in an area that would support it. Can we have both?

 

The same problem occurs with multis, virtuals and the like. If I pull coordinates for all caches in my area, impose these on the map, and look at desity -- I don't get the *real* picture. What am I missing? I'm missing unlisted multi's that do not have coordinates posted, I am seeing multi's that are "not at this location" in their listings, I am missing whether the caches are micros or traditionals. Of course, the new filtering is awesome (see, not all of us complain!).

 

A little planning goes a long way and this activity has multiple ways to be enjoyed.

Link to comment
I'm not sure how you did your math but you definitely got that last figure wrong. You were probably confused by my cumulative totals which are confusing....

Oops, I misunderstood.

 

I was wondering about your totals, however. Are virts included in the totals?

 

I was also considering something that was posted a few days ago. It stands to reason that as we grow, more caches will be placed in urban areas. This hasn't stopped caches from being placed in rural areas, however. There are more people in urban areas, and those areas tend to support mostly micros. Rural areas have less people and, therefore, less caches. These caches tend to include a higher percentage of 'traditional' caches.

Link to comment
...One thought I has was: will Groundspeak ever allow for micros and traditionals to exist in the same radius? ...

The thing is, micros are traditionals.

 

If I pull coordinates for all caches in my area, impose these on the map, and look at desity -- I don't get the *real* picture. ...

 

You just made me think of what we really needed. A map of one's caching area with micros, and regular-sized caches marked with different colored pins.

 

edit: since the above inea doesn't include a time factor, it would not show whether one type is in recession, it would, however show if all types are 'healthy' in an area. Also, obviously the area would also have to be large enough to show that it wasn't a limited, localized issue.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
The writing is on the wall.

Yup. But I see different words that some see. I see growth in the number of all caches.

There's still a lot more caches to hunt than there was in 2001. Both Urban micros and rural regular size caches. If Urban micros grows a little faster than the other for a while, that should be expected. I believe that the Urban micro is a short term "fad". It may grow a bit more, but it will fade. The diehards will continue to try to find new and exciting places to hide caches.

 

Part of the Urban micro thing is about numbers and some people's desire to be part of the group. If the number of rural regular caches continue to grow, what's the problem?

Link to comment

Geocaching is like a smorgasbord...a buffet. If you like the roast beef...get some. If you don't like the black eyed peas, don't order any. And don't worry...the black eyed peas aren't going to take over the roast beef (assuming, of course, the government doesn't get involved).

Link to comment
I'm not sure how you did your math but you definitely got that last figure wrong.  You were probably confused by my cumulative totals which are confusing....

Oops, I misunderstood.

 

I was wondering about your totals, however. Are virts included in the totals?

 

I was also considering something that was posted a few days ago. It stands to reason that as we grow, more caches will be placed in urban areas. This hasn't stopped caches from being placed in rural areas, however. There are more people in urban areas, and those areas tend to support mostly micros. Rural areas have less people and, therefore, less caches. These caches tend to include a higher percentage of 'traditional' caches.

I'm starting to see why CR doesn't like to read your posts. :)

 

Virtuals were included in my figures. The percentage totals for micros would increase slightly if they were omitted but that wouldn't change the trend

 

The fact that more people live in urban areas is completely irrelevant. They (collectively) are living in the same place that they have always lived. They just choose to hide a greater percentage of micros these days.

Link to comment
:lol: I know this is a really easy question, but I have looked all over every piece of information and can't find the answer, so I will apologize right now for my lack of knowledge. What is a microcache. I have tried to find 3 caches and failed only to come back and find out that it is a microcache. Where should i look? What do they look like? Can someone send a picture of it? I am stumped and the family is losing interest because we come up short each time we hunt. Thanks!
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...