Ever shrinking cache containers

[Yurt]

I've been looking at the graph of the sizes of caches we've found over the past few months and up until then the three main sizes were just about even, shared between micro, small and regular.
However the micro has become ever more common. It's outstripping the rest of our finds as more and more hiders place micros. There are some very inventive micros which I've enjoyed almost as much as any cache but there is a preponderance of mint tins, bisons and rivets. I don't mind a well placed bison, a well camoed mint tin in the right spot (with a proper sized ziplock inside) can be good too. I'm pretty much over the rivets though.

Can't insert the pic from GC to illustrate, sadly.

[caughtatwork]

I'm not sure about that.
Your micro rate is about 20-30% of your finds. Some months a little higher, some a little lower.
In percentage terms, you seem to be relatively steady.
In absolute terms, I couldn't comment.
Are you sure it's not just a perception thing?

[Yurt]

I was only going on the GC finds and I recall before we did a big run in NW Sydney a few months back that they were all sitting around 270ish. After that run (a LOT of micros) the micros got away from the rest and have stayed there.
Maybe it was just that moment in time I am remembering.

[caughtatwork]

Still keeping all of your cache finds together ('cos that's what we do). Small is still your biggest category with micros about the same and regular a little ways behind.

http://geocaching.com.au/cacher/Yurt/gr ... ainer_size

[pjmpjm]

What you hide. will be what you find! (If you Hide it, they will come!) as more and more new players start, and find only micor's and smalls, then ther perceoption is " that is what we need to hide" and so the propagation of micro's and smalls will continiue.

Yep. My perception exactly. And I suspect that different areas in the various states are already developing their own most common 'types' of caches, of whatever size, because of the phenomenon that Pesky! has mentioned.

[Yurt]

Yes it is probably a function of more urban caches as time goes by. Originally caches were bush things as far as I can tell but as the game has evolved the micro has come to the fore. As a result there are so many available urban caches that the bush ones are rather neglected by comparison.

The advantages in placing a micro are you don't have to provide any SWAG and you can hide them almost anywhere. If they get muggled it's no big deal. The downside is with tricky camo which may require more maintenance, however a bison tube poked into a hole should last as long as its log book and it will probably be replaced by our caring community.

[rogerw3]

Mate, if you are finding that micros do not float your boat, don' find them, just ignore them.
That is what I do, unless I am with some cruel person like pjmpjm who will make all sorts of threats and make me find them, he does that just to enjoy himself at my expense and since he is driving I can't very well say no and be left stranded in the middle of nowhere!
When by myself I have no problem walking right by them even if I know exactly where they are.

Having said that I have also ignored quite a few other caches recently just because I was having too much fun finding and hiding frogs and did not want to spend the precious few minutes I had looking for GC.

[caughtatwork]

Cache size is a sad situation.
http://geocaching.com.au/stats/graphs/a ... ze_percent
75% of caches hidden nowadays are small or micro.

Maybe we need "Hide an Ammo Can" day / month?

[Hoojar]

So how long until someone hides a picocache?!

[blossom*]

Cache size is a sad situation.
http://geocaching.com.au/stats/graphs/a ... ze_percent
75% of caches hidden nowadays are small or micro.

Maybe we need "Hide an Ammo Can" day / month?

Yes, not a bad concept for some future project. But not ammo cans necessarily, just 1 litre capacity or bigger

[pjmpjm]

Still keeping all of your cache finds together ('cos that's what we do). Small is still your biggest category with micros about the same and regular a little ways behind. http://geocaching.com.au/cacher/Yurt/gr ... ainer_size

A slight diversion to congratulate caw on the mind-boggling amount of information, some in the form of coloured pie charts, available here at GCA! Absolutely amazing.

I really encourage everyone to start exploring their personal stats as well as the overall stats, state by state and nationwide.

Interesting to note that Yurt has made approximately 24% of his finds in the micro/nano range while I have 21%.

[pjmpjm]

Interesting to note that Yurt has made approximately 24% of his finds in the micro/nano range while I have 21%.

Continuing to browse through the amazing GCA stats . . .

Another interesting factoid . . .

rogerw3 shows .9% of his overall finds as nanos whereas only .87% of my own finds are nanos!

(Of course, everyone knows it's only because I made him find 'em . . .)

[blossom*]

rogerw3 shows .9% of his overall finds as nanos whereas only .87% of my own finds are nanos!

(Of course, everyone knows it's only because I made him find 'em . . .)

And becasue you hid them, so can't find them yourself!

[Richary]

Cache size is a sad situation.
http://geocaching.com.au/stats/graphs/a ... ze_percent
75% of caches hidden nowadays are small or micro.

Maybe we need "Hide an Ammo Can" day / month?

I think maybe we do! The interesting thing is if you change it to GCA stats most of the container sizes are Other. Also curious about the huge jump in virtuals in September 2010.