LTF!

For all your general chit chat, caching or not.
User avatar
Yurt
4500 or more caches found
4500 or more caches found
Posts: 1509
Joined: 01 May 09 10:08 pm
Location: Northern Suburbs, Sydney

LTF!

Post by Yurt » 02 June 10 6:05 pm

Well we all pride ourselves on our FTFs (first to finds) and there are even STFs or 2TFs up to FTF (4th to find!) but who can say they've got a LTF (last to find)?

A nearby cache which we'd logged a DNF on last year is on the verge of archiving. It's in a National Park for starters, the cache owner disabled it a month or so back with the words "I don't geocache any more" - only found 15 caches anyway; it's not a great container and the owner didn't want it adopted out so an archive notice appeared last night.

Eager to cross it off our DNF list I managed to find a short cut in (it's normally a 4km round trip) and eventually found it and removed it thus being the Last To Find. Normally you wouldn't know at the time you were last to find as if it's been muggled you wouldn't know.

So now what do I do with the cache? Nothing in it worth saving apart from the geocoin which I'm moving on.

User avatar
blossom*
3000 or more caches found
3000 or more caches found
Posts: 1588
Joined: 25 February 09 1:59 pm
Location: West Ryde

Re: LTF!

Post by blossom* » 02 June 10 6:51 pm

Email the orwner and ask if they want it. Otherwise, throw it out if there's nothing worth recycling.

User avatar
Yurt
4500 or more caches found
4500 or more caches found
Posts: 1509
Joined: 01 May 09 10:08 pm
Location: Northern Suburbs, Sydney

Re: LTF!

Post by Yurt » 02 June 10 8:25 pm

blossom* wrote:Email the orwner and ask if they want it. Otherwise, throw it out if there's nothing worth recycling.
They've lost all interest. I'll give them the opportunity to reclaim the Glad Wrap box and assorted junk. They can come and get it. The log is the only worthwhile thing.

User avatar
Richary
6500 or more caches found
6500 or more caches found
Posts: 4139
Joined: 04 February 04 10:55 pm
Location: Waitara, Sydney

Re: LTF!

Post by Richary » 02 June 10 8:30 pm

Usually LTF would be a worry if you have a particularly high number, as it could well indicate you were spotted getting the cache. This one is different of course.

It was once discussed in passing at an SA event that it might be interesting to see if a particular team might be rather high in the LTF stakes. Some people seem to worry less about stealth than others, and I do wonder if those after record attempts may be less inclined to leave one for later if there are too many muggles around (note I am not making any accusations here).

Though I must admit when I was caching with a 4yo in tow it was hard to stop the screams of "Found it" in a crowded park :oops:

User avatar
homedg
1550 or more caches found
1550 or more caches found
Posts: 798
Joined: 24 February 06 3:15 pm
Location: South West Sydney

Re: LTF!

Post by homedg » 02 June 10 8:46 pm

richary wrote:Usually LTF would be a worry if you have a particularly high number, as it could well indicate you were spotted getting the cache. This one is different of course.

It was once discussed in passing at an SA event that it might be interesting to see if a particular team might be rather high in the LTF stakes. Some people seem to worry less about stealth than others, and I do wonder if those after record attempts may be less inclined to leave one for later if there are too many muggles around (note I am not making any accusations here).

Though I must admit when I was caching with a 4yo in tow it was hard to stop the screams of "Found it" in a crowded park :oops:

C@W already has it covered.
http://geocaching.com.au/stats/cachers/ ... s_last_day

User avatar
FarmerFrentzen
5000 or more caches found
5000 or more caches found
Posts: 180
Joined: 04 August 08 11:09 am
Location: Sydney

Re: LTF!

Post by FarmerFrentzen » 02 June 10 9:53 pm

richary wrote:..............I do wonder if those after record attempts may be less inclined to leave one for later if there are too many muggles around (note I am not making any accusations here)..............
I can certainly see where you are coming from here Richard. I have noticed previously that caches have gone missing when particular groups on a raid go through an area.

We paid particular attention to not compromising cache locations during our run of 210 in 24 hours. By the time I got around to logging my finds I noticed that most of the caches we had found had at least another finder after our visit which was pleasing. :)

CAW's stats make interesting reading. Incidentally 2 of our team (Steeba and myself) don't appear in the last day find stats. Despite the other 2 making the list this would perhaps indicate that we achieved our goal in setting a record without compromising the cache hides. It is also interesting to see that Richary is fairly high up the list. Perhaps record attempts are only a minority in relation to the cause of last day finds. :-k

User avatar
maccamob
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 915
Joined: 04 April 03 6:37 pm
Location: Hoppers Crossing, VIC
Contact:

Re: LTF!

Post by maccamob » 02 June 10 10:33 pm

FarmerFrentzen wrote: CAW's stats make interesting reading...
They do indeed, and they worried us at first. Then we noticed that most of the teams near the top are very active. It would be interesting to see those stats when expressed as a proportion of each team's total finds.

User avatar
Big Matt and Shell
6500 or more caches found
6500 or more caches found
Posts: 1905
Joined: 11 February 07 9:53 pm
Twitter: BigMattandShell
Contact:

Re: LTF!

Post by Big Matt and Shell » 02 June 10 11:45 pm

richary wrote: Some people seem to worry less about stealth than others, and I do wonder if those after record attempts may be less inclined to leave one for later if there are too many muggles around (note I am not making any accusations here).
Sorry Richary, you can't write, "some people seem to be..." and then say that your not making accusations. That sounds very much like an accusation.

I think FF covered my thoughts about our record attempt pretty well but there are a few concerning numbers. I know for a fact that I have had two muggled caches after a team on a record attempt visited my cache. That said I have had caches muggled by a normal cacher does that mean that they didn't take care or does S%^& just happen?

http://geocaching.com.au/stats/cachers/ ... s_last_day

From what I can see the top 20 are all prolific cachers and it stands to reason that your bound to be last to find when you have found 7000 caches. Also how about the caches I have found for people and have removed their cache on their request that also counts against me. Numbers can be taken in so many different ways...

User avatar
Richary
6500 or more caches found
6500 or more caches found
Posts: 4139
Joined: 04 February 04 10:55 pm
Location: Waitara, Sydney

Re: LTF!

Post by Richary » 02 June 10 11:53 pm

maccamob wrote:They do indeed, and they worried us at first. Then we noticed that most of the teams near the top are very active. It would be interesting to see those stats when expressed as a proportion of each team's total finds.
A lot more analysis could be done, like how long before the LTF was the next DNF reported. But obviously the higher you are on finds, the more likely it is you will be LTF to find on a cache.
FarmerFrentzen wrote:
richary wrote:..............I do wonder if those after record attempts may be less inclined to leave one for later if there are too many muggles around (note I am not making any accusations here)..............
I can certainly see where you are coming from here Richard. I have noticed previously that caches have gone missing when particular groups on a raid go through an area.
I too have noticed the same, though I haven't noticed a significant number on caches I own (or used to but still watch) in Adelaide after record attempts. Though some logs I have seen from people in the past seem to indicate that stealth wasn't the highest priority. But I also knew some local people who didn't seem to care if they were seen doing the retrieval, they were numbers people and I am not sure if still active or not.
It is also interesting to see that Richary is fairly high up the list. Perhaps record attempts are only a minority in relation to the cause of last day finds. :-k
Yes I am a bit surprised I am that high. I am hoping it is just coincidence as I can't think of times I have gone for it despite muggles. I will happily walk away, sometimes even if I can see it if there are too many people around. I guess the stats are skewed as well by reporting caches as needing maintenance/archived even though you have found it; and then are archived so you are the last finder. And I do tend to report non maintained caches that are in a bad condition as one or the other, so the owner or admins may well archive them shortly after.

Perhaps C@W can generate an easy query that would allow any user to show their LTFs. Then we can review our last logs and see if we have somehow compromised the cache and avoid doing so again if we have in fact not used enough stealth. Though thinking about it perhaps Last Day Find would be better, as if multiple people have found it on the same day I oubt GCA can work out who was the last actual finder for the day.

User avatar
pprass
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 911
Joined: 18 December 03 11:52 pm
Location: Port Macquarie

Re: LTF!

Post by pprass » 03 June 10 2:45 pm

maccamob wrote:....most of the teams near the top are very active.
Not only that but if you actually analyse the circumstances of those last finds you will find that there are many other reasons why the cache wasn't found after your find.
This topic was brought up some years ago and C@W provided us with a list of the actual caches that made up our statisitc.
After looking into each cache, here is what we found:
Some caches were archived after our find due to fire, flood etc.
We actually found caches that had been archived because the owner thought they had disappeared, but that still showed up as us being LTF.
The owner on some occasions just archived the cache after our "needs maintenance" note - didn't want to play anymore.
There were a few other reasons as well that I can't remember.

team waldron
2500 or more caches found
2500 or more caches found
Posts: 193
Joined: 27 May 05 10:44 pm
Location: South Australia

Re: LTF!

Post by team waldron » 03 June 10 3:36 pm

According to the SA stats I have 18 caches that meet this criteria.

Does it include event and overseas caches that appear as archived?

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16185
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: LTF!

Post by caughtatwork » 03 June 10 4:07 pm

AU and NZ only.
I think not CITO and Event (but not 100% sure).

User avatar
homedg
1550 or more caches found
1550 or more caches found
Posts: 798
Joined: 24 February 06 3:15 pm
Location: South West Sydney

Re: LTF!

Post by homedg » 03 June 10 4:16 pm

team waldron wrote:According to the SA stats I have 18 caches that meet this criteria.

Does it include event and overseas caches that appear as archived?
A very interesting point. :-k

team waldron
2500 or more caches found
2500 or more caches found
Posts: 193
Joined: 27 May 05 10:44 pm
Location: South Australia

Re: LTF!

Post by team waldron » 03 June 10 5:08 pm

caughtatwork wrote:Re: LTF!
AU and NZ only.
I think not CITO and Event (but not 100% sure).
Can you please PM me a list of the 18 caches?

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16185
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: LTF!

Post by caughtatwork » 03 June 10 5:43 pm

If I get time, I'll try tonight.

Post Reply