Artificially bumping stats?

2.6k · May 13, 2011

I was browsing at these two events, seems like a group of cachers from Germany are coming to the UK and holding an event on arrival and another before their departure.

http://coord.info/GC2NTPX

http://coord.info/GC2NTPZ

What caught my eye was the very high difficulty and terrain ratings, yet deployment of the wheelchair logo - I asked on one of the pages but have not received a reply. Is Crawley really that dangerous these days? :rolleyes:

What's going on?

2.8k · May 13, 2011

Didn't think the D/T rating really meant anything on an event cache.

1.7k · May 13, 2011

Didn't think the D/T rating really meant anything on an event cache.

Yes it does, but not if it's in a pub!

eg, An event on the top of Ben Nevis might have a high D/T rating

2.6k · May 13, 2011

Didn't think the D/T rating really meant anything on an event cache.

Errr what?

Of course it does, what an odd thing to say!

If it didn't mean anything, why would the option be present, and secondly how would people with limited mobility know if they could attend or not?

2.6k · May 13, 2011

Didn't think the D/T rating really meant anything on an event cache.

Yes it does, but not if it's in a pub!

eg, An event on the top of Ben Nevis might have a high D/T rating

It is even important to have an accurate rating if it is in a pub, I recently wasted money crossing London to get to a pub event that had wheelchair logo, yet I could not access the bar nor the lavatory. Accurate info beforehand would have prevented me wasting my money and time.

1.3k · May 13, 2011

Difficulty 5: Pub only sells Keg

Terrain 5: Wheelchair access non existent

I think it's a fair rating :rolleyes:

1.7k · May 13, 2011

Not sure if the rules guidelines have changed, but a while back I had a new cache fail the review process due to it having the wheelchair attribute and a terrain of 1.5 :unsure:

May 13, 2011

Not sure if the rules guidelines have changed, but a while back I had a new cache fail the review process due to it having the wheelchair attribute and a terrain of 1.5

Me to, I don't suppose there is anything stopping the attribute being added after the cache / event has been accepted though.

2.6k · May 13, 2011

Not sure if the rules guidelines have changed, but a while back I had a new cache fail the review process due to it having the wheelchair attribute and a terrain of 1.5

Me to, I don't suppose there is anything stopping the attribute being added after the cache / event has been accepted though.

On the two caches above, the difficulty and terrain ratings have increased over the course of time since they were published ... but why, if not a stats thing?

May 13, 2011

Not sure if the rules guidelines have changed, but a while back I had a new cache fail the review process due to it having the wheelchair attribute and a terrain of 1.5

That would not stop the cache being published by itself, but you might get a polite reviewer note

The same goes if you've indicated a 1 star for terrain and not used the wheelchair attribute.

Andy

Red Duster

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Edited May 13, 2011 by Red Duster

2.6k · May 13, 2011

Not sure if the rules guidelines have changed, but a while back I had a new cache fail the review process due to it having the wheelchair attribute and a terrain of 1.5

That would not stop the cache being published by itself, but you might get a polite reviewer note

The same goes if you've indicated a 1 star for terrain and not used the wheelchair attribute.

Andy

Red Duster

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

That's the trouble with guidelines, and why it is important to give accurate information of the cache page - without accurate inf it turns the hunt into a wild goose chase on occasions.

But, keeping on topic, would any reviewer care to comment on the two caches mentioned in post 1 above please?

1.3k · May 13, 2011

Yeah... c'mon UK reviewers... let them have it!!!!

Just don't tell them your name, Pike.

1k · May 13, 2011

Not sure if the rules guidelines have changed, but a while back I had a new cache fail the review process due to it having the wheelchair attribute and a terrain of 1.5

That would not stop the cache being published by itself, but you might get a polite reviewer note

The same goes if you've indicated a 1 star for terrain and not used the wheelchair attribute.

Andy

Red Duster

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

That's the trouble with guidelines, and why it is important to give accurate information of the cache page - without accurate inf it turns the hunt into a wild goose chase on occasions.

But, keeping on topic, would any reviewer care to comment on the two caches mentioned in post 1 above please?

a reviewer just has

May 13, 2011

yup someone just filling in blank spots on the 81 matrix me thinks!

May 13, 2011

1.4k · May 13, 2011

Considering McD's policy on disabled access I fail to see how they can even think of rating it more than 1 or 1.5.

Difficulty 5??? even a blind person could find a McD's.

Event caching Germany style.

3k · May 13, 2011

Considering McD's policy on disabled access I fail to see how they can even think of rating it more than 1 or 1.5.

Difficulty 5??? even a blind person could find a McD's.

Event caching Germany style.

But you've been to a 1/5 event Richard...... http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4538b17b-e671-4243-80f7-4ccd6bb90f92

1.4k · May 13, 2011

Yeah but that was a bumpy campsite and I know the Crawley area. :unsure:

3k · May 13, 2011

Yeah but that was a bumpy campsite and I know the Crawley area.

:laughing:

1.3k · May 13, 2011

Thinking about it... London is quite a swim from Hamburg!

May 13, 2011

Event caching Germany style.

c'mon be fair, at least they are planning to show up

1.3k · May 13, 2011

The difficulty and terrain ratings can be set to whatever the cache owner likes. Obviously it's nice if the cache owner sets it to something realistic, but Groundspeak do not insist on it. I recently had a run in with a "LIAR" cache being set as a 5/5. Arrived on site expecting great things, only to find it a drive-by (1.5 terrain, 1 difficulty at most) with information in the cache container inviting the finder to be dishonest in their logs to suit the difficulty/terrain rating the cache had. I complained and was told Groundspeak HQ do not approve or disapprove of the activity of LIAR caches and the D/T can be set to whatever the CO likes! Brings me back to my other posting about these challenge caches, what's the point? the D/T ratings are meaningless!

Jon

Edited May 13, 2011 by Dakar4x4

May 14, 2011

Reviewing a cache is a bit like taking a car for an MOT, all you can say it passed at the time. When we review caches we do look at the terrain rating and if set at one star do suggest the wheelchair accessible attribute is set but its not a fail if its not and its up to the cache owner to do the right thing. As you are all aware the cache owner can change a page any time they like, and as reviewers we can only step in if the changes means the cache no longer complies with the guidelines.

Andy

The Long Man

Volunteer UK Reviewer - geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources http://www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Guidelines http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books http://support.Groundspeak.com//index.php

3.7k · May 14, 2011

I recently had a run in with a "LIAR" cache being set as a 5/5. Arrived on site expecting great things, only to find it a drive-by (1.5 terrain, 1 difficulty at most) with information in the cache container inviting the finder to be dishonest in their logs to suit the difficulty/terrain rating the cache had.

Bit curmudgeonly complaining about that, surely? The occasional "liar" cache is just a bit of fun, and usually you can spot them quite easily anyway.

1.1k · May 14, 2011

What caught my eye was the very high difficulty and terrain ratings, yet deployment of the wheelchair logo - I asked on one of the pages but have not received a reply. Is Crawley really that dangerous these days?
What's going on?

It's not just these ones, they appear to make a habit of holding events with artificially and grossly inflated terrain/difficulty.

I know many Germans, both socially and via business, and they are great people. But when it comes to caching, it seems a higher proportion than usual have some very strange ideas and practices. I mean, holding an event in a MacDonalds, how bizarre can you get :lol: .

Needless to say, I WON'T be going on any of these events :lol: .

Rgds, Andy

May 14, 2011

these challenge caches, what's the point? the D/T ratings are meaningless!

Jon

I have to disagree with you Dakar, I recently published a challenge and i think the d/t is befitting of it and even as a stand alone cache the terrain would be appropriate...but fair enough they are open to abuse and i think the challenges are good because they give something to work towards!

1.3k · May 14, 2011

Bit curmudgeonly complaining about that, surely? The occasional "liar" cache is just a bit of fun, and usually you can spot them quite easily anyway.

Depends how much time and expense you go to in getting to the cache and no, there was no indication whatsoever that the cache was a LIAR cache.

J

1.3k · May 14, 2011

I have to disagree with you Dakar, I recently published a challenge and i think the d/t is befitting of it and even as a stand alone cache the terrain would be appropriate...but fair enough they are open to abuse and i think the challenges are good because they give something to work towards!

I didn't say your cache D/T ratings were incorrect, I'd like to think they are correct and likewise all mine are correct too and reflect both our perceptions of the D/T's of the cache. That doesn't mean EVERYONES are, since they are not an enforced thing and rely on peoples interpretation and indeed their desire to set them to something accurate, the whole idea of having challenges based on them goes out the window. I could go and set 91 drive by 1/1 caches in a line but published covering every single D/T combination, call it the Easy Challenge series and it would not be against any rules.

Because the D/T ratings are based on the CO's interpretations, I don't think you ever could really enforce rules about them, thus my lack of interest in the whole challenge thing. In my mind, if I can get my name on the piece of paper in your cache, I should be allowed to log it. No IF's, no BUT's. It's called a "FOUND IT" log, not a "Challenge completed log". That's my interpretation and how I am now going to play the game. To avoid conflict though, I will simply ignore all these challenge caches.

J

1.1k · May 15, 2011

In my mind, if I can get my name on the piece of paper in your cache, I should be allowed to log it. No IF's, no BUT's. It's called a "FOUND IT" log, not a "Challenge completed log". That's my interpretation and how I am now going to play the game. To avoid conflict though, I will simply ignore all these challenge caches.

In one sense your interpretation is wrong, because these types of cache are specifically permitted and approved by Groundspeak, so their logs are NOT simply "FOUND IT" logs but "Challenge completed AND found it" logs.

In the sense that they are open to being "fiddled" you are completely right. But why is that so different to almost every aspect of cache logging? Each person logs according to their own rules, which can be drastically different from one person to the next and is why comparing stats in ANY way is so completely pointless.

My own particular logging rules require that I look for every cache and access every cache location myself, and largely solve every puzzle by myself, or be totally certain that I could have done so if necessary.

I quite like many higher terrain caches, and every one I've logged I have reached the hiding place myself. While looking through some higher terrain caches last night while planning a trip I was struck by what a high percentage of people didn't. In one case, a group of 20 individually logged a 5/5 cache as found even though only one of them actually reached it; the others openly admitted that they wouldn't have been able to. Now, I've no objection to them doing so, but I would object to someone making a comparison between their stats and mine. BTW, it was interesting that as far as I could see, the only one of the group who logged it as a note rather than a find was drsolly.

I still enjoy looking for higher terrain caches even though others with less stringent personal rules might log them without having achieved the intended actions. I avoid all forms of armchair logging and I avoid caches with artificially inflated difficulty or terrain ratings, which is why I wouldn't attend these events (quite apart from them being held in a McD :lol: ). I may think that these practices and others are strange or just silly, or self deception, or cheating, or whatever, but they don't affect me and they don't bother me.

In the same way I enjoy reaching a high terrain cache I might also enjoy tackling a challenge cache, completed or otherwise according to my own rules, just like everything else. I'm sure you wouldn't avoid an interesting high terrain cache just because other "finders" were rather more easy going about what "find" actually means. Completing a challenge is just the same - do it according to your own rules and ignore any shortcuts that others might take, and it becomes a genuine challenge.

Rgds, Andy

9.2k · May 15, 2011

Event caching Germany style.

c'mon be fair, at least they are planning to show up

I wonder if I can 'sofa attend' :laughing:

1.1k · May 15, 2011

Event caching Germany style.

I have seen a few events over here published with odd terrain ratings that have been in pubs. One had a comment on it including the word BINGO

May 15, 2011

I posted a note on that event when it was published querying the terrain rating of 4.5. I actually got a reply from the CO confirming my suspicions that it was for the stats. I won't be attending even though I need a 5/5 for my D/T grid!

May 15, 2011

Yep, looks like it is a fiddle for for the stats. Easiest thing is not to worry about it. Go out and find some nice caches instead.

6.2k · May 15, 2011

All very strange. A 5/5 pub event. Now, if it were in the Tan Hill Inn (1732ft above sea level) in January, and you were required to walk across the moors naked to reach it. At night. Whilst carrying an anvil-sized TB and singing the Geocaching Anthem - in Latin - well, *then* and only then would they be onto something!

For D/T Grid stat fans, The Geolympix Mega will have at least one of every combination within 10 miles/16Km of the venue. That's genuine, sensible ratings of D & T. No mountains near Oxford so you know the 5T is going to be a pig of a multi with a LOT of walking required. Also some swimming..? Ah, sweet evil plans! :laughing:

May 15, 2011

Apart from the glaring 5/5 issue, I feel mildly insulted that they feel the need to hold both events at a McDonalds. Proper cuisine in the UK is perfectly good should you look around a bit.

:blink:

9.2k · May 15, 2011

Apart from the glaring 5/5 issue, I feel mildly insulted that they feel the need to hold both events at a McDonalds. Proper cuisine in the UK is perfectly good should you look around a bit.

Exactly. What's wrong with BK?

:laughing:

3.7k · May 15, 2011

If I wanted to attend an event with a silly rating and was interested in the Bingo card game I'd simply post a note rather than log the event.

It wouldn't put me off attending, but there's no point in trying to fill the D/T grid by cheating. You may as well stay at home, print it off and fill it in with a pen. If a cache has been genuinely rated 5/5 or whatever (even if slightly incorrectly) then it counts, but if it bears little relation to the actual experience then it's a waste of time and spoils your game.

But no reason to avoid attending!

1.3k · May 15, 2011

Apart from the glaring 5/5 issue, I feel mildly insulted that they feel the need to hold both events at a McDonalds. Proper cuisine in the UK is perfectly good should you look around a bit.

A joke I first heard in German

3 Shortest books in the world:

English Cuisine

American Culture

Italian WWII heroes

May 16, 2011

I have seen a few events over here published with odd terrain ratings that have been in pubs.

I know a few "rough" pubs where T5 might well be appropriate!

2.6k · May 16, 2011

I posted a note on that event when it was published querying the terrain rating of 4.5. I actually got a reply from the CO confirming my suspicions that it was for the stats. I won't be attending even though I need a 5/5 for my D/T grid!

Well that's alright then <_<

I've seen a few challenge caches that specifically exclude events and wondered why, now I know one reason ...

1.7k · May 17, 2011

I posted a note on that event when it was published querying the terrain rating of 4.5. I actually got a reply from the CO confirming my suspicions that it was for the stats. I won't be attending even though I need a 5/5 for my D/T grid!

Well that's alright then

I've seen a few challenge caches that specifically exclude events and wondered why, now I know one reason ...

we're well stocked on 5/5 caches, but need a 4.5 / 5, however I wouldn't feel happy using this cache for it...

Lost, if you need a 5/5, then I'm sure someone in the area would be prepared to act as 'guide'!

May 17, 2011

Lost, if you need a 5/5, then I'm sure someone in the area would be prepared to act as 'guide'!

Is anyone prepared to find and retrieve a 5/5 whilst I simply look on shouting encouragement? :hopeful:

1.3k · May 17, 2011

Just locate a "Liars" cache... plenty of 5/5 drivebys if you look for 'em.... :rolleyes:

1.3k · May 17, 2011

In my mind, if I can get my name on the piece of paper in your cache, I should be allowed to log it. No IF's, no BUT's. It's called a "FOUND IT" log, not a "Challenge completed log". That's my interpretation and how I am now going to play the game. To avoid conflict though, I will simply ignore all these challenge caches.
In one sense your interpretation is wrong, because these types of cache are specifically permitted and approved by Groundspeak, so their logs are NOT simply "FOUND IT" logs but "Challenge completed AND found it" logs.

In the sense that they are open to being "fiddled" you are completely right. But why is that so different to almost every aspect of cache logging? Each person logs according to their own rules, which can be drastically different from one person to the next and is why comparing stats in ANY way is so completely pointless.

Why settle for something that can be so easily fiddled? Especially on something that has such great potential as a challenge cache? We already have a system that would easily support the creation of a set of challenge caches - each could contain some required information that is needed to solve the final challenge puzzle cache? Or even do away with the final challenge cache itself, and simply have a Souvenir that is allocated when all the challenge criteria have been met. This would remove the complication of having a normal cache that can be found by anyone, logged as found by anyone, but then potentially result in logs being deleted. As more new folks get introduced to caching via mobile devices and apps, how complicated do they need to have it when they find and log something, only to then have it deleted? Why have all these rules when they can be avoided by a better approach to the challenge in the first place?

J

1.7k · May 17, 2011

we're well stocked on 5/5 caches, but need a 4.5 / 5, however I wouldn't feel happy using this cache for it...

Agreed!

5/5 caches are so common these days it's a joke!!

Not too far from us you just have to climb a short way up a tree... hardly very taxing.

Why do COs think that everyone wants to find 5/5 caches?

How about some:

5/3 - only 59 in the UK

5/3.5 - only 17 in the UK

4.5/5 - only 27 in the UK

(There's 146 5/5 caches!!)

Mark

1.3k · May 17, 2011

we're well stocked on 5/5 caches, but need a 4.5 / 5, however I wouldn't feel happy using this cache for it...

Agreed!

5/5 caches are so common these days it's a joke!!

Not too far from us you just have to climb a short way up a tree... hardly very taxing.

Why do COs think that everyone wants to find 5/5 caches?

How about some:

5/3 - only 59 in the UK

5/3.5 - only 17 in the UK

4.5/5 - only 27 in the UK

(There's 146 5/5 caches!!)

Mark

Isn't the lack of them part of what makes up the challenge?

Jon

1.7k · May 17, 2011

Isn't the lack of them part of what makes up the challenge?

Jon

True, and yes we did drive quite a long way to do a certain 1.5/5 last Saturday :lol:

It's just that most d/t ratings are just 'pucked out of the air' anyway so why not pluck a more convenient number....?

Mark

May 17, 2011

we're well stocked on 5/5 caches, but need a 4.5 / 5, however I wouldn't feel happy using this cache for it...

Agreed!

5/5 caches are so common these days it's a joke!!

Not too far from us you just have to climb a short way up a tree... hardly very taxing.

Why do COs think that everyone wants to find 5/5 caches?

How about some:

5/3 - only 59 in the UK

5/3.5 - only 17 in the UK

4.5/5 - only 27 in the UK

(There's 146 5/5 caches!!)

Mark

I think part of the problem may be the rating thingy that suggests the rating. Sometimes I've answered honestly, its come out with a rating that I think in no way reflects the real difficulty of the cache - I often then rate them down based on my judgement but I imagine many do not (either through ignorance or blind trust in the system).

3k · May 17, 2011

we're well stocked on 5/5 caches, but need a 4.5 / 5, however I wouldn't feel happy using this cache for it...

Agreed!

5/5 caches are so common these days it's a joke!!

Not too far from us you just have to climb a short way up a tree... hardly very taxing.

Why do COs think that everyone wants to find 5/5 caches?

How about some:

5/3 - only 59 in the UK

5/3.5 - only 17 in the UK

4.5/5 - only 27 in the UK

(There's 146 5/5 caches!!)

Mark

I think part of the problem may be the rating thingy that suggests the rating. Sometimes I've answered honestly, its come out with a rating that I think in no way reflects the real difficulty of the cache - I often then rate them down based on my judgement but I imagine many do not (either through ignorance or blind trust in the system).

I think a lot of the time it's also down to people not even bothering to use Clayjar, and assuming that a pair of wellies or a wetsuit, and a torch are "specialist equipment" - coupled with the tendency to automatically slap a 5 difficulty on the front to match the terrain, regardless of whether the cache difficulty actually warrants it :rolleyes: :unsure:

1.4k · May 17, 2011

Apart from the glaring 5/5 issue, I feel mildly insulted that they feel the need to hold both events at a McDonalds. Proper cuisine in the UK is perfectly good should you look around a bit.

Quite agree, some nice khebab shops, chinese take ways and indian restaurants in Crawley so why a McD's?? :unsure: <_< <_<

5/5 for as khebab shop is ok as there is always a risk involved.

Edited May 17, 2011 by DrDick&Vick

Artificially bumping stats?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment