Are We Getting Lazy?

Post by **caughtatwork** » 06 November 05 12:19 pm

The new graph has been changed to include Found and Hidden on the same graph.

I've had to supress the number labels as they get in the way.

It looks like the find (both terrain and difficulty) and hide averages are indeed coming down overall.

Not necessarily by much given the number of players in the game though.

Of course averages is not the best mark of this as a T5 and a T1 average to a T3 whereas a T4 and a T2 will do the same and two T3's will end up the same. So from the averages you can't tell whether there are lots of hard and lots of easy or just lots of middle of the road.

The Garner Family · Post by **The Garner Family** » 06 November 05 1:04 pm

I don't think that this is meaningful unless these difficulties were compared against hides. i.e. people may be doing easier finds because others are placing easier finds.

EDIT: I should add... I can see that that is in the graphs, but a mean a numerical comparison.

Biggles Bear · Post by **Biggles Bear** » 06 November 05 6:05 pm

C@W are you able to put on the stats for state page a couple of pie graphs showing the total number of active caches for the state broken down by terrain and difficulty?

Post by **caughtatwork** » 06 November 05 7:19 pm

Biggles Bear wrote:C@W are you able to put on the stats for state page a couple of pie graphs showing the total number of active caches for the state broken down by terrain and difficulty?

Anything for the esteemed Bear.
http://www.caughtatwork.net/geocaching/graphs

On the state and all states page graphs number 14 and 15 I think is what you are after.

cheeeeese2001 · Post by **cheeeeese2001** » 06 November 05 10:04 pm

bigmickb wrote:Do you reckon you could get to Panorama Cache before I get to Tower 126?

The battle has been won. Mick and I did Tower 126 today. Quite an achievement I reckon and it'll be a long time before I attempt such a cache again. I agree that with so many closer to home and requiring much less effort, we have incentives to be lazy.

BTW, I haven't posted much as I keep forgetting about the forums

cheeeeese2001 · Post by **cheeeeese2001** » 06 November 05 10:04 pm

bigmickb wrote:Do you reckon you could get to Panorama Cache before I get to Tower 126?

The battle has been won. Mick and I did Tower 126 today. Quite an achievement I reckon and it'll be a long time before I attempt such a cache again. I agree that with so many closer to home and requiring much less effort, we have incentives to be lazy.

BTW, I haven't posted much as I keep forgetting about the forums

Biggles Bear · Post by **Biggles Bear** » 07 November 05 7:24 am

caughtatwork wrote:
Biggles Bear wrote:C@W are you able to put on the stats for state page a couple of pie graphs showing the total number of active caches for the state broken down by terrain and difficulty?
Anything for the esteemed Bear.
http://www.caughtatwork.net/geocaching/graphs

On the state and all states page graphs number 14 and 15 I think is what you are after.

Thank you. Yes

Facitman · Post by **Facitman** » 07 November 05 9:56 am

Not everyone is doing 1/1's.

Another tough cache has just been FTF after 15 months. Rhinogeo, Stickler, Bruce and Dea found Derringer's Catherine's Cradleon the weekend.
 
A Congratulations thread is here:Well Done!

Mr Walker · Post by **Mr Walker** » 07 November 05 11:09 am

Depends what you mean by tougher. I have only found about 70 caches in a year. A factor of my location, mainly. The ones I have had by far the most difficulty with are inner city caches, on my rare visits to the city.
I have put out quite a few, including some multis which require long walks, if not abseiling or white water rafting. It is true that the more remote ones are rarely visited, while those along the roadways are found regularly. I can sympathise with this after caching away from home, spending a lot of time looking for a cache and not finding it. (Sometimes the experience, as in "Watch out for that rock" compensates for the disappointment, sometimes not.) I tend to make my "remote" caches a bit bigger. (They are not going to be spotted by many passers by.) This allows me to put in a range, and better quality, of goodies, to help repay the effort people make to find them. One even has a final off set cache, which changes location now and then and hold things like vouchers for the local pictures or bookshops. This makes it worthwhile for people to go back for another look.

dajjct · Post by **dajjct** » 07 November 05 11:46 am

Because my time is limited, I tend to do caches only in areas where I am already travelling due to family (read kids) having things on in the area. The number of cache's being placed also means that you don't need to go far to visit quite a few. If I had the spare time, I would love to do some of the harder cache's, but fitting it in with a family of 6 and one car can be very hard.

rhinogeo · Post by **rhinogeo** » 07 November 05 6:20 pm

caughtatwork wrote: Difficulty peaked at 2.01 in September 2001 and has finished at 1.66 for November 2005.

Terrain peaked at 1.96 in September 2001 and has finished at 1.64 for November 2005.

With the 58 caches that Facitman and I did last Sunday on the Spring Caching Carnival we ended up with:

an average of 1.77 for Difficulty (14 @ 1, 17 @ 1.5, 13 @ 2, 10 @ 2.5, 4 @ 3),

and 1.56 for Terrain (26 @ 1, 14 @ 1.5, 9 @ 2, 3 @ 2.5, 6 @ 3)

Not too far off the average

Catherine's Cradle at a rating of 4.5/4.5 was considerably harder (both mentally and physically) than finding 58 in a day

GIN51E · Post by **GIN51E** » 07 November 05 6:27 pm

cheeeeese2001 wrote:
bigmickb wrote:Do you reckon you could get to Panorama Cache before I get to Tower 126?
The battle has been won. Mick and I did Tower 126 today. Quite an achievement I reckon and it'll be a long time before I attempt such a cache again. I agree that with so many closer to home and requiring much less effort, we have incentives to be lazy.

BTW, I haven't posted much as I keep forgetting about the forums

I was going to get that one this upcomming Saturday

xf king · Post by **xf king** » 07 November 05 8:14 pm

Wow, all I can say is that I thought the Milgrove track was a challengte, but it seems that there can be more.

I dont mind physical challenge from time to time just like the Milgrove track in Warburton these caches are all the ones that will take 2 - 5 hours. With hard slogging all the way there and back. I would love to try out that River cache someday, but being in Vic I dont think I will get around to it or never will.

As for the puzzle caches.. personally im not very into puzzles. So I tend to stay away from these unless its only a fairly small multicache that makes sense.

For most of the time I am lazy, choosing the easier caches to do, and leaving hard ones to find with other people. Usually because fo a safty issue on when i go out alone.

Not forgetting that geocaching is a family oriented game, most little kids wont want to walk out in the bush for 2 hours let alone 5.

My only advice is not to go out alone on any 4-5 star caches and bring suitible gear and do some reasearch first.

Enjoy guys,

Hounddog · Post by **Hounddog** » 08 November 05 1:20 am

cheeeeese2001 wrote:
bigmickb wrote:Do you reckon you could get to Panorama Cache before I get to Tower 126?
The battle has been won. Mick and I did Tower 126 today. Quite an achievement I reckon and it'll be a long time before I attempt such a cache again. I agree that with so many closer to home and requiring much less effort, we have incentives to be lazy.

BTW, I haven't posted much as I keep forgetting about the forums

Congratulations Guys. It's a tough walk out to that one, especially at this time of year with the flies/heat and all. Well Done.

Hounddog

bigmickb · Post by **bigmickb** » 08 November 05 1:15 pm

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. And thanks for the well wishes, Hounddog. We enjoyed the Tower immensely!