Dr Solly

[+bones1]

A great achievement by Dr solly on his 40,00th cache find, jeff=bones1.

[+speakers-corner]

Well done Doc.

[+wmpastor]

I'd love to hear some of Doc's stories (most caches in a day, most memorable find, etc.), but I guess he's outdoors caching.

[+bflentje]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

[+NeverSummer]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

Woah. Now that would be another achievement... I don't know how you'd do that these days...without spending lots of time and $$, that is

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

 

Or someone that lives in Puerto Rico. For someone living in Puerto Rico, finding 1000 caches would be just a bit less than 100% of all the caches in the country. When you've got 180,000 caches to find in your country it's obviously going to be easier to rack up a 5 digit find count than if you live someplace with a few hundreds caches and might have to travel thousands of miles to ever reach 1000 finds.

 

 

[+NeverSummer]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

 

Or someone that lives in Puerto Rico. For someone living in Puerto Rico, finding 1000 caches would be just a bit less than 100% of all the caches in the country. When you've got 180,000 caches to find in your country it's obviously going to be easier to rack up a 5 digit find count than if you live someplace with a few hundreds caches and might have to travel thousands of miles to ever reach 1000 finds.

Yeah. Like Alaska!

[Mr.Yuck]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

 

Would you be impressed if I broke 3,000 with under 25% micros? Only 200 away.

 

Hmm. drsolly #1 in the UK, and with less than 10 years of Geocaching (joined August 2006). I'd say they've done a fair amount of caching.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

 

Or someone that lives in Puerto Rico. For someone living in Puerto Rico, finding 1000 caches would be just a bit less than 100% of all the caches in the country. When you've got 180,000 caches to find in your country it's obviously going to be easier to rack up a 5 digit find count than if you live someplace with a few hundreds caches and might have to travel thousands of miles to ever reach 1000 finds.

Yeah. Like Alaska!

 

I'd rather find 10 caches in Alaska, then have 10,000 finds and never visit Alaska.

[+ArtieD]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

 

There's nothing wrong with micros.

[knowschad]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

 

There's nothing wrong with micros.

 

Except for their size, I'd have to agree with you.

[+blackdog7]

I'd love to hear some of Doc's stories (most caches in a day, most memorable find, etc.), but I guess he's outdoors caching.

 

[sarcasm]Doc's stories aren't worthy because he's obviously a 'numbers' guy and 'numbers' guys aren't real geocachers.[/sarcasm]

[+MartyBartfast]

I'd love to hear some of Doc's stories (most caches in a day, most memorable find, etc.), but I guess he's outdoors caching.

 

Well when he isn't caching he's blogging (I expect he does other things too), so he tends to write up a blog for his day's adventure, e.g. http://blog.drsolly.com/2015/02/forty-thousand.html

[Mr.Yuck]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

There's nothing wrong with micros.

Of course not. Your 6,000 finds would be less than 3,000 without them.

 

[sarcasm]Doc's stories aren't worthy because he's obviously a 'numbers' guy and 'numbers' guys aren't real geocachers.[/sarcasm]

No one thinks that. That's just what you think we think. Or have been told we think.

 

I'd love to hear some of Doc's stories (most caches in a day, most memorable find, etc.), but I guess he's outdoors caching.

 

Well when he isn't caching he's blogging (I expect he does other things too), so he tends to write up a blog for his day's adventure, e.g. http://blog.drsolly.com/2015/02/forty-thousand.html

 

Pretty nice, and lot of other thoughts besides Geocaching. I've followed it.

Edited February 26, 2015 by Mr.Yuck

[+ArtieD]

Except for their size, I'd have to agree with you.

 

Since when does size dictate the quality of a cache?

 

Of course not. Your 6,000 finds would be less than 3,000 without them.

 

Yep, it's true. Point?

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Ah, micro bashing.

For over 12 years we find them as they come and as I see that 58% of my finds are micro's I'm guessing that about 58% of the caches hidden are micro's. The only time I target a cache is if its in a remote area , there is history involved, or its an earthcache. I like all sizes and have never understood the " size " complaints. Who doesn't like an ammo can and I like the challenge of finding micro's, esp. in the woods. My only wish is that ALL sizes of caches would be hidden in the woods, dessert, swamp, or other remote muggleless and traffic free area.

[+humboldt flier]

I'd love to hear some of Doc's stories (most caches in a day, most memorable find, etc.), but I guess he's outdoors caching.

 

[sarcasm]Doc's stories aren't worthy because he's obviously a 'numbers' guy and 'numbers' guys aren't real geocachers.[/sarcasm]

 

SNNNNOOOORRRRRTTTTTTTT,

 

Major tongue in cheek going on here.

[+humboldt flier]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

 

There's nothing wrong with micros.

 

EXCEPT:

 

They are closely related to those pesky button nano's which we ham-fisted, sausage fingered old geezers have trouble with. GRRRRRRRRR, LOL, LOL

[+humboldt flier]

Ah, micro bashing.

For over 12 years we find them as they come and as I see that 58% of my finds are micro's I'm guessing that about 58% of the caches hidden are micro's. The only time I target a cache is if its in a remote area , there is history involved, or its an earthcache. I like all sizes and have never understood the " size " complaints. Who doesn't like an ammo can and I like the challenge of finding micro's, esp. in the woods. My only wish is that ALL sizes of caches would be hidden in the woods, dessert, swamp, or other remote muggleless and traffic free area.

 

With adequate secure parking and at least waypoints denoting a trailhead.

 

As a transient cacher frequently caching in strange areas I have been on many a "joyride" before finding the correct access point ... O.K. part of the fun sometimes, however, not so much fun at altitudes above 8 K or in the desert above 90º

 

Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Ah, micro bashing.

For over 12 years we find them as they come and as I see that 58% of my finds are micro's I'm guessing that about 58% of the caches hidden are micro's. The only time I target a cache is if its in a remote area , there is history involved, or its an earthcache. I like all sizes and have never understood the " size " complaints. Who doesn't like an ammo can and I like the challenge of finding micro's, esp. in the woods. My only wish is that ALL sizes of caches would be hidden in the woods, dessert, swamp, or other remote muggleless and traffic free area.

 

With adequate secure parking and at least waypoints denoting a trailhead.

 

As a transient cacher frequently caching in strange areas I have been on many a "joyride" before finding the correct access point ... O.K. part of the fun sometimes, however, not so much fun at altitudes above 8 K or in the desert above 90º

 

Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

I here you.....we've found them at + 14000 and - 250. Our real adventures have been my taking short cuts shown on my units to get back to where we started.

[+blackdog7]

Ah, micro bashing.

For over 12 years we find them as they come and as I see that 58% of my finds are micro's I'm guessing that about 58% of the caches hidden are micro's. The only time I target a cache is if its in a remote area , there is history involved, or its an earthcache. I like all sizes and have never understood the " size " complaints. Who doesn't like an ammo can and I like the challenge of finding micro's, esp. in the woods. My only wish is that ALL sizes of caches would be hidden in the woods, dessert, swamp, or other remote muggleless and traffic free area.

 

When I was introduced to geocaching, it was with a family member. The cache they took me to was a micro hidden in a small hollowed out pine cone....in the middle of the woods. Later that day we found another, this time a micro in a lamp skirt. Both blew my mind. Today I regard the pine cone cache as an all time favorite...and I hold great contempt for lamp skirts.

 

To each hi/her own, I say.

[Mr.Yuck]

Except for their size, I'd have to agree with you.

 

Since when does size dictate the quality of a cache?

 

Of course not. Your 6,000 finds would be less than 3,000 without them.

 

Yep, it's true. Point?

 

We are SO going to get pimp slapped for turning Drsolly's thread into a micro bashing thread. I will discuss this with you in the next one that comes up.

 

Here's on Topic. I found out from reading his blog he's the guy who originally wrote Dr. Solomon's Anti-Virus!! But it's long since been sold to McAfee, and I don't even think the name Dr. Solomon is out there any more.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

 

When I was introduced to geocaching, it was with a family member. The cache they took me to was a micro hidden in a small hollowed out pine cone....in the middle of the woods. Later that day we found another, this time a micro in a lamp skirt. Both blew my mind. Today I regard the pine cone cache as an all time favorite...and I hold great contempt for lamp skirts.

 

 

I had the same reaction when I found my first lamppost cache. "Great hide" I thought. Now it has become just a place to stash a cache in a Wal-Mart parking lot so people can find lots of caches.

 

I suspect if everyone started hiding nanos in pinecones at every trailhead, some people (myself included) would be sick of those as well.

[+Car54]

My only wish is that ALL sizes of caches would be hidden in ... dessert.

 

Mmmmm - caches in my dessert!

 

Mrs. Car54

[+bflentje]

Ah, micro bashing.

For over 12 years we find them as they come and as I see that 58% of my finds are micro's I'm guessing that about 58% of the caches hidden are micro's. The only time I target a cache is if its in a remote area , there is history involved, or its an earthcache. I like all sizes and have never understood the " size " complaints. Who doesn't like an ammo can and I like the challenge of finding micro's, esp. in the woods. My only wish is that ALL sizes of caches would be hidden in the woods, dessert, swamp, or other remote muggleless and traffic free area.

 

I didn't bash micros. I merely said that I'd be impressed by someone crossing the 40,000 mark that that had a small percentage of micro finds. Cachers finding 1000's of caches are a dime a dozen and the majority of their finds generally ARE micros. Show me a cacher with 40,000 finds where 75% of their finds are regular instead of 75% micro (or reported as small but called micro).

[+niraD]

My only wish is that ALL sizes of caches would be hidden in ... dessert.

Mmmmm - caches in my dessert!

Wait, that's a different thread!

 

[+NYPaddleCacher]

My only wish is that ALL sizes of caches would be hidden in ... dessert.

 

Mmmmm - caches in my dessert!

 

Mrs. Car54

 

I read that if you find a cache in a pi that you'll get a souvenir for that.

 

 

[knowschad]

Except for their size, I'd have to agree with you.

 

Since when does size dictate the quality of a cache?

 

Of course not. Your 6,000 finds would be less than 3,000 without them.

 

Yep, it's true. Point?

 

Sorry you didn't appreciate (or notice) my attempt at humor. Carry on.

[+ArtieD]

Except for their size, I'd have to agree with you.

 

Since when does size dictate the quality of a cache?

 

Of course not. Your 6,000 finds would be less than 3,000 without them.

 

Yep, it's true. Point?

 

Sorry you didn't appreciate (or notice) my attempt at humor. Carry on.

 

Sometimes it escapes me.

[+jellis]

I'll be impressed when someone crosses the 40,000 mark when less than 25% of their finds are micros.

Okay

How about 54.47% micros?