Are We Getting Lazy?

rhinogeo · Post by **rhinogeo** » 08 November 05 2:17 pm

Didn't we have a rating system before GA was revamped that gave an average of (difficulty + terrain) for all the caches one had found?
I just did a quick calculation and came up with a rating of 3.35 for myself using that method

Post by **CraigRat** » 08 November 05 2:28 pm

I've done that for caches in Tasmania.. it's interesting stuff

http://craigrat.geocaching.com.au/index.php?opt=Stats

Post by **CraigRat** » 08 November 05 2:37 pm

rhinogeo wrote: I just did a quick calculation and came up with a rating of 3.35 for myself using that method

My avg is 3.24 .. I need to get more extreme!

setsujoku · Post by **setsujoku** » 08 November 05 3:12 pm

CraigRat wrote:I've done that for caches in Tasmania.. it's interesting stuff

http://craigrat.geocaching.com.au/index.php?opt=Stats

You have too much time on your hands, to think of some of the stats like that, like common words in a log

Any chance of those stats for other states

setsujoku · Post by **setsujoku** » 08 November 05 3:12 pm

CraigRat wrote:I've done that for caches in Tasmania.. it's interesting stuff

http://craigrat.geocaching.com.au/index.php?opt=Stats

You have too much time on your hands, to think of some of the stats like that, like common words in a log

Any chance of those stats for other states

Post by **CraigRat** » 08 November 05 5:17 pm

setsujoku wrote:Any chance of those stats for other states

Ummm... it wouldnt be too hard.. in theory

Post by **caughtatwork** » 08 November 05 7:23 pm

The data here gets extremely skewed due to low count finders.

eg. 1 or 2 finds but if they happen to have a hit a 4/4 then their average comes out to 8
ie. (4+4)/1

This puts graphing out of the question as the 'lowest' score is 6 and there are half a dozen with a perfect 10

Bubble Bear has 1 find on a 5/5.
austy has 1 find on a 5/5.
bops_s has 1 find on a 5/5.

Post by **caughtatwork** » 08 November 05 8:52 pm

http://www.caughtatwork.net/geocaching/ ... ?state=ALL

Everything.
Please note this includes ALL finders, even international finders.
They will be assigned to a state based on their HIGHEST number of finds in an Australian state, so they may not be genuine residents of that state.

setsujoku · Post by **setsujoku** » 08 November 05 9:06 pm

Interesting stats. until im actually look at C@W's pages, the stats (apart from number of finds, as a mental note) dont even get thought about, so its interesting to see what the averages of people are, as far as difficulty and terrain go.

When im planning a cache, ill have a look at the terrain/difficulty, to see what kind of time/effort im going to have to put in, but dont think anything else of it after that.

Hounddog · Post by **Hounddog** » 10 November 05 8:41 am

I guess it comes down to the caches you REALLY want to do vs the caches you do just because they are there, but whatever you do it usually turns out to be fun.

The beauty of this sport is that it can be as hard or as easy easy going as you want. One day you can find yourself scouring crocodile infested swamps, and the next, your searching amonst the office workers in the middle of the city.

Certainly it's a game of contrasts, but it's more player controllable than most sports I know of.

Damo. · Post by **Damo.** » 11 November 05 10:23 am

Perhaps we need to promote the "Recommend this Cache" feature we have available on GCA. A lot of Forum members here may not be aware of it if they are only making use of the forum part.
You can find your GCA cacher page at:
http://geocaching.com.au/cacher/FORUM NAME
or by clicking on the banner at the top of the page and looking under the MY tab.
Look through the list of finds you have. If there are any that stand out as particularly great Caches, go to the Cache page and if you wish, you can Recommend it by clicking the "Actions - Recommend" link on the right hand side.

Geodes · Post by **Geodes** » 11 November 05 12:30 pm

It would be nice if the 'Recommended' system could be enhanced a bit by a, say, 1-5 star rating which finders could give to caches they find.

Mind Socket · Post by **Mind Socket** » 11 November 05 1:23 pm

Recommendations and ratings systems have been discussed at length already. We got close to something of a consensus, but changes for this aren't high on the todo list.

Papa Bear_Left · Post by **Papa Bear_Left** » 11 November 05 1:29 pm

The data for a given cacher also gets skewed if there's a relative scarsity of available caches.

For example, we did a lot of high-difficulty multi-caches in Sydney when we started (because we find the challenge to be fun) and so our stats showed a high proportion of multis vs traditionals.
After a year or so in Christchurch, though, our ratio had moved closer to the norm because we'd found _all_ the caches within a couple of hours drive and so lost the ability to pick and choose.

I bet the mega-finders like Maccamob have a find ratio very, very close to the overall available cache type ratio.

GIN51E · Post by **GIN51E** » 13 November 05 10:45 pm

bigmickb wrote:
GIN51E wrote:I was going to get that one this upcomming Saturday
You still can! It's well worth the effort. I look forward to reading your log.

Done,

Very much worth the effort, suggest a few other's get out and stretch their legs.

don't let the track profile scare you in anyway.