What is a normal success rate for finding the cache?

[+bwyatt11]

I've just started caching. Couldn't find the first one on the first try. Went back the next day and found it. Got my GPS and found the second one right away. Failed to find the third one, but found the fourth without much trouble. Went back the next day and tried at length to locate number three and failed again. Today I tried for number five and failed. Went to lunch, went back armed with the extra hint and everyone's comments and still failed to find. That makes me 3 out of 5 so far. Is this normal, or am I just a newbie that's not very good?

[+Cardinal Red]

I've just started caching. Couldn't find the first one on the first try. Went back the next day and found it. Got my GPS and found the second one right away. Failed to find the third one, but found the fourth without much trouble. Went back the next day and tried at length to locate number three and failed again. Today I tried for number five and failed. Went to lunch, went back armed with the extra hint and everyone's comments and still failed to find. That makes me 3 out of 5 so far. Is this normal, or am I just a newbie that's not very good?

 

Most of us will attest that as newbies we were not very good. I'm still challenged by many tricky micro's. The actual "success rate" is dependent on MANY factors, but experience does make a huge difference. 60% for a newbie isn't bad and it will get better.

 

How good are the hiders coordinates and how good is your own GPS lock.

 

Does the cache hider have a reputation for evil hides and or intentionally soft coords.

 

Does the hider include a good hint on the cache page.

 

Is the Difficulty rating closer to 1 or 5.

 

Is the Terrain conducive to a thorough search.

 

Is the size of the cache closer to a fingernail or a fishbowl.

 

Do you genuinely try to find the caches on your own or do you regularly reach out to your list of 100 prolific geo-friends for a hint or even a downright spoiler at the drop of a hat.

 

Has the cache been found recently or has it's find track record suddenly changed for the worse dramatically.

 

And some times it just comes down to pure luck.

[+cachepohl]

Being a comparably new cacher myself I'd say - it's normal. You won't always find the caches you go for. And that rate is far from 'bad'.

Depending on both experience and difficulty level, some are easier to find, some are tricky, even if all are on D value 1 - 1.5 ...

I tend not too hard hook on one cache if I don't find it, there are many others to go for. And after a while, a day, week, month you'll get the idea where that particular one MUST be :-)

Over time, the 'cacher's eye' develops, so you find them easier. Like typical ways to hide a cache, but still there's a good chance that some tricky hide will come across your path that you cannot solve. Take it as a part of the game, and always enjoy the search. The find is merely the topping :-)

 

Above all - have fun

Michael

Edited May 16, 2013 by ubbie66

[+stijnhommes]

I went caching in Venice during my holiday the past week, and because of the narrow streets coordinates were off more than usual and I had to get used to a whole new way of hiding caches in a new country.

I had entire days without finds and others where I had more than a dozen across a single day, while also doing some sightseeing.

 

My own success rate depends on a lot of things, but 60% sounds pretty good for 5 tries by a beginner.

I remember an early cache in my home town which I visited at least 6 times. I couldn't for the life of me figure out where it was, until I finally found it hooked on the back of the fence that I checked some 5 odd times before. Sometimes, it just takes time to catch on. Don't sweat it.

[+Chief301]

Another forum thread recently discussed this very topic, and the consensus among experienced cachers was that 10-20% DNF rate is about the norm. 3 out of 5 is not bad for being brand new at this.

 

You will develop skills and learn what to look for over time, and your find rate will improve. But DNF's are part of the game....if you were guaranteed to find every cache it wouldn't be much of a challenge, would it?

 

Reminds me of the old Twilight Zone episode where the hard luck gambler passed away and thought he was in heaven because he got to gamble all day and never lost. After a couple of days of nothing but winning he realized that gambling wasn't fun anymore....and that he was actually in hell 🔥👹🔥

Edited May 16, 2013 by Chief301

[+Harry Dolphin]

Almost to 9 years geocaching, and 4444 finds, my DNF rate runs about 15%. I can trip over 1/1's and not find the cache. I can also find difficult caches with no problem. Part geosense, part quality of hide, part mindset that day.

[+bwyatt11]

Thanks so much for the replies! I'm hunting alone... well not exactly... I've got my trusty sidekick on a leash with me (see avatar). My success rate dropped a bit after today. Went after number 6 and number 7 this evening. GPS was sooooo accurate on this one. When I got to GZ I was standing over it. Well hidden, but easy to discover. Number 7 was a two stage deal... had to find a tool first to find the cache. Never found the tool. Went back for the third time to hunt for number five and failed again. This time I was armed with a satellite image in my head, but still no dice. I'm 4 of 7. At this point, I really do believe it would be helpful to hunt with someone who has developed an eye. I'm good with the GPS, that comes natural for me, but I don't have an eye for how things are hidden. I'm really enjoying this new hobby!

[+macatac1961]

Couldn't find the first one on the first try. Went back the next day and found it.

 

This describes my first two days also. After nine years I'm averaging about 10 - 15% dnf's.

[+The_Incredibles_]

A DNF rate of 10-20% is pretty normal. I think you're doing great for a newbie.

 

Our first find was nearly a DNF. We were looking in blackberry vines because that's where our GPS zeroed out. 2nd one we were looking in totally the wrong area. 3rd one took us 1/2 hour of 4 people searching to find a cache in the only stump in the area. Find #4 was a total DNF-we were actually searching 100 meters from the coordaintes. Anyway, let's just say things got much easier.

 

Just relax and enjoy yourself in the meantime.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

If somebody tells you they ALWAYS find 'em all... do remember to put salt on that statement before you swallow it.

 

Sure, it gets easier (or better) with practice, but you still would be hard-pressed to get them all.

 

We admire your persistence for returning again and again. A new day sheds new light, yes? And... do look at everything 'cuz some things are not always what they initially appear to be.

[+edscott]

6188 found, (5908 found on first try, 280 found later), 702 DNFs, & 422 never found.

[+Cardinal Red]

6188 found, (5908 found on first try, 280 found later), 702 DNFs, & 422 never found.

 

This is a thread about NORMAL success rate. Check out Ed's avatar: a Map and Compass. That is how he finds caches. Not exactly normal Ed, but quite impressive. I would be happy with those numbers.

[+bwyatt11]

Tried for number 8 today and struck out. It was a micro, 1.5/1.5. Really thought I could find this one. I'm going back again this weekend and see if I can figure it out. I'm 4/8 now... 50%.

[+cachepohl]

Tried for number 8 today and struck out. It was a micro, 1.5/1.5. Really thought I could find this one. I'm going back again this weekend and see if I can figure it out. I'm 4/8 now... 50%.

 

Don't stick too tight at your figures , anyone doing statistics would say that your base is still small :-)

My first finds were comparably easy, but then there were several I simply couldn't find. If I had put those figures on a graph, I'd stopped caching immediately as the sight would have been frustrating ^^.

Just keep on trying, and remember that some hides can be very tricky, especially with micros.

 

One I had was the size of a film canister (or what it's called, English is not my first language), hidden behind a reflector - when you pulled at the reflector, you found it was glued to the canister which was stuck in a hole.

Took us 3 approaches at that time to find it.

 

Another intricate one was a small tree branch, cut in half and carved out so it could hold a small can, and camouflaged later by adding magnets to keep the two halves together. And the branch naturally attached to a dead part of a tree again using magnets. Tricky, but still difficulty around 1.2 - 2.

 

That's just to give you an idea to look for anything that may appear unusual in some way at GZ once you get there. As said before, you'll develop ideas how it might be hidden - and once you think you got it all in your mind, you stumble into some other ingenious idea of another CO

 

Enjoy the search, take DNFs (which I usually don't log yet since usually it's my own dumbness, only doing when in perfect doubt that the cache might have been corrupted) as encouragement and don't stick too much at your stats.

 

e.g. I myself don't give much about figures, I deleted some I did alone and not together with my daughter, so we can share 'milestones' together. Not meaning much but something to share some cookies or ice cream on

Last week we tried 2 caches when we were in town, didn't find one - so it was 0% BUT - we saw some corners of our home town we weren't aware of earlier, which is in the intention of geocaching.

 

Enough said, musing doesn't help to find ...

Let's go out and get those boxes

Michael

[zapatista2010]

taking the plunge for the first time later this week - hoping to find at least one of the 5 cache details I've downloaded - not using a gps as such, using a mobile. Depending on how it goes might invest in a gps at somepoint in the future and if I decide to start hiding some for fellow hunters

[+QClan]

Tried for number 8 today and struck out. It was a micro, 1.5/1.5. Really thought I could find this one. I'm going back again this weekend and see if I can figure it out. I'm 4/8 now... 50%.

Look at recent logs for your DNFs. They'll tell you when it was last found. Some COs take pity on new cachers and may send a hint if you post a Dnf.

 

A few tips. Look less at your gps the last thirty feet or so and more for hiding places. Coords are sometimes off, as is your gps. Look for trails left by cachers. Look at the size of the cache you're looking for. Look for sticks piled in a straight line or an odd pile of rocks. Look at te base of a tree, by fallen trees, in stumps, in holes in trees, or in branches. Lamp post skirts lift, btw.

[+bwyatt11]

Some COs take pity on new cachers and may send a hint if you post a Dnf.

 

Indeed. I got just such a hint, went back this morning and located the one I couldn't find yesterday. It was smaller than a dime, wedged between some conduit and a metal pole. Very helpful hint. This helped my to learn how it was hidden and what type objects I might be looking for. I'm 5 for 9 now.

[+Lonemorf]

One month in, I am at 21 finds, with 5 DNFs.

There are 2 in particular that I cannot do, but I will get them one day.

 

Due to caching with my kids, I do a lot of research prior to going out with them - I generally look for caches with swaps/trades, and I also look at the last date found and if there were many DNFs recently - there is nothing more demoralising for a 6 and 8yr old than a series of DNFs!

That said, There are a few I go after "for me", the one on Eastbourne Pier being one - I see that as a true challenge to find, and one day I will succeed!

 

Sounds like you are having a blast all the same - and thats what its all about!

[+briansnat]

I have slightly over a thousand finds and a bit over 200 DNFs, so I DNF caches in roughly 1 out of 5 tries.

[+bwyatt11]

I have slightly over a thousand finds and a bit over 200 DNFs, so I DNF caches in roughly 1 out of 5 tries.

 

Do you ever go back to the DNF's to see if you can find it?

[+sasqwatches]

we have been really lucky we have only had 2 or 3 DNF's out of 118 BUT we always go back within the 2 or 3 days and look extra hard we dont like being defeated by an inanimate object also helps that there are a crap load of stop sign micros around which really helps the dnf to find ratio but the kids still love those caches so its all good

Edited May 23, 2013 by sasqwatches

[+bwyatt11]

Sorry, I'm new. What is a "stop sign micro?"

 

By the way, I got my rechargeable batteries for my garmin today!

[+briansnat]

I have slightly over a thousand finds and a bit over 200 DNFs, so I DNF caches in roughly 1 out of 5 tries.

 

Do you ever go back to the DNF's to see if you can find it?

 

Only if I have a good reason to. For instance last year I went back for one because it was a really cool area and I was alone when I DNFed and wanted my wife to see the spot. Found it on my 2nd try. Most of the time however I don't bother. I saw the place the CO wanted to bring me and I'm happy with that.

[+sasqwatches]

Sorry, I'm new. What is a "stop sign micro?"

 

By the way, I got my rechargeable batteries for my garmin today!

micro container on a stop sign, no passing sign, yield, sign any road sign really

 

on a side note we are new at this also we started in december\january it is such a blast to do we all love it in our family even the 4 year old sqwatch

Edited May 24, 2013 by sasqwatches

[+ByronForestPreserve]

I've started seeking some caches with higher difficulty ratings to see how they're hidden and learn some tricks...but I'm having problems finding them, lol. I spent the better part of an hour climbing all over an old section of trestle bridge today and came away with nothing but a few ticks. I feel like I'm in that awkward stage where I can find 99% of caches that are the standard kind of hides but I haven't found enough really creative/difficult ones to even know what to look for...but that means I'm not super proud of the smiley nor super upset at a DNF. So...I guess I don't pay attention to my find rate, but I've had fun either way.

[+bwyatt11]

Well... I've gotten rained out the past two evenings. Yesterday my rechargeable batteries came for my new garmin etrex 10. Gonna head out this evening and over the weekend and see what I can find. The weather is supposed to be perfect.

[+ldyparadox99]

I started 2 weeks ago or so and so far haven't found 2 out of 9 I actively looked for. One of the 2 was while we were in Osnabruck and I think it was geared more towards those that knew the area already and whatnot. Plus my mother was still foofooing it (I converted her) and didn't want to hang around in that area all day.

 

Of the 9, there were also 2 that took going back to several times. One was a micro (found that sucker tonight! first micro find!), had to go back 2x. The other was actually our second cache and a multi that we accidentally started. Around here they say Ikea tests marriages...no, I think multi caches do! ;-) But, after trying 6x over 2 weeks, we finally found it last night. When we finally got the final location right (we were there 3 of the 6x) we spend probably about 4 hours total looking. We found it when we were about ready to do another walk of shame back to the car.

 

And incidentally, I found out that the area of the forest I've been jogging through for the past 3 years has a randomly spawned set of concrete stairs leading up to a giant fire pit. That was a little surreal.

[+edexter]

I think you will find there is a learning curve and that after a few hundred finds you will get noticeably better at finding well hidden caches. Keep in mind that you can only find caches that are actually there and unless and until other people post "dnfs" and the CO acknowledges that "the cache was missing" it's not possible to tell the difference between a missing cache and one you didn't find. I think a 85-90% find rate is the best you should hope for. I've been tracking my dnfs (which run about 10%-15) for a couple of years and just under half of them turn out to have been missing, which means that the limit is 95% or so. There are many cachers who do not log dnf's for some reason so don't expect perfection.

Edited May 24, 2013 by edexter

[+MountainWoods]

After today's 4 finds out of 7 searches, I thought I'd check how I'm doing (with 182 finds so far). Result is that my find / sought ratio is just under 90% (%89.2).

 

I do log all of my DNFs. In a very few cases I had logged the same cache more than once as a DNF. But to be able to calculate the ratio, I went back and changed some of my DNFs to Write Notes if they were redundant or I later found the cache (in no case were they needed as DNF to signal the CO that there were issues, except maybe with me!). The result is that my 22 DNFs represent all of the caches that I had tried to find and never could.

 

Thus, I have sought 204 caches and eventually found 182 of them, as of today.

[+bwyatt11]

Enjoying the responses. Information is very helpful! We're headed out hunting within the hour.

[+bwyatt11]

We were out for 3 hours today. Went to 4 sites and found 3. The best part... the 3 we found were sites that were previously DNF's for me! I'm 8 for 10 now!

[+bwyatt11]

Another great day today! Headed out this evening and found the 2 remaining DNF's on my list. We tackled a new one and found it. I'm 11 for 11! Beginning to get the hang of it and having a blast!

[+bwyatt11]

Found a micro yesterday and another micro today... so I was 13 for 13 until I went for number 14. This one was listed as a multicache. The description says it used to be a multicache, but two of the three stages are gone so it's now just a single cache. The log shows regular find up until October of last year, then nothing until December when a member with 335 finds marks it "DNF." Although it is listed as a micro, the hint makes the location really obvious and I'm real confident that the cache is MIA. Looks like the structure it was mounted to was damaged when some artwork was attached to it.

 

I'm wondering how often anyone runs up against a poorly maintained cache site? IMO this should have been changed from the multicache listing when it stopped being one. Instead, it's still listed that way with an explanation that it "used to be." With no finds for 7 months, you'd think some explanation is in order, wouldn't you?

[+Chief301]

I'm wondering how often anyone runs up against a poorly maintained cache site? IMO this should have been changed from the multicache listing when it stopped being one. Instead, it's still listed that way with an explanation that it "used to be." With no finds for 7 months, you'd think some explanation is in order, wouldn't you?

 

Only almost every time I go out 😚

 

Seriously, some cache owners just don't take the responsibility seriously. Missing caches, damaged caches, wet logs, all are part of the game. Over time you'll probably start to recognize which cachers in your area have a reputation for poor maintenance (or zero maintenance), bad coordinates, or who obviously quit playing two years ago but some of their caches are still out there. We have a couple of cachers my area who are like that. I'll look for their caches if they're on my itinerary for the day but I won't waste a lot of time on them either.

 

So what can you do?

 

Check recent logs. Has the cache been found recently? A series of DNF's, a Needs Maintenance log, or a long time without a find are all indicators that a cache might be missing. I wouldn't waste too much time looking for a cache like that, there's more just up the road.

 

Log a NM (Needs Maintenance) log. This will notify the owner that there may be a problem. They should go out and check on their cache. However, they might not.

 

If NM logs have already been posted and the owner is clearly ignoring them, a Needs Archived log may be the next step. This will notify the reviewer who will notify the owner once again that they need to maintain their cache and give them a deadline (usually 30 days or so) to do the necessary maintenance. If they still won't respond, the reviewer can then archive the cache.

 

If the maintenance need is minor (needs a new log, for instance), many cachers carry spare logs and add a clean replacement log. So you could help by doing that.

 

The main thing is, don't fret over missing or damaged caches. You will encounter them often. There's plenty more out there, just move on and have fun.

Edited May 29, 2013 by Chief301

[+bwyatt11]

Thanks for the info Chief.

[+bwyatt11]

I've got to change my game plan here. Today I located the general site of a micro. The description said to watch for the poison ivy, not to mention the snakes, nats, spiders webs and spiders, mugglers on the trail above was akin to a Walmart entrance on sale day. I just took this picture and moved on. Not so sure I'm in for this hobby if this is what it is.

 

Edited June 21, 2013 by bwyatt11

[+wmpastor]

I went caching in Venice during my holiday the past week, and because of the narrow streets coordinates were off more than usual and I had to get used to a whole new way of hiding caches in a new country. I had entire days without finds....

It must be that metric thing. It trips me up also.

[+wmpastor]

I've got to change my game plan here. Today I located the general site of a micro. The description said to watch for the poison ivy, not to mention the snakes, nats, spiders webs and spiders, mugglers on the trail above was akin to a Walmart entrance on sale day. I just took this picture and moved on. Not so sure I'm in for this hobby if this is what it is.

 

Your experience proves that there is a place for lamppost caches.

 

But seriously, there are umpteen types of caches - something for everyone!

[+ldyparadox99]

While I've only managed a few more caches since my last post in this thread, I can really attest there's all sorts of caches out there. In the 14 (working on #15 since I refuse to log the bloody thing as DNF) I've found so far there's been unintentional bushwacking, wading through nettles, climbing a steep hill, 2 "hidden in plain sight", having to climb a tree, having to be taller than 5'4 to reach it (thank god for tall dutchies), having to wiggle under a bike bridge on your belly like a snake, and a few "walk right up to it" caches.

 

I've found it's really important to read the cache page for anything the CO writes as well as the logs because then I know how to dress or who/what I should bring with me!

[+stijnhommes]

I went caching in Venice during my holiday the past week, and because of the narrow streets coordinates were off more than usual and I had to get used to a whole new way of hiding caches in a new country. I had entire days without finds....

It must be that metric thing. It trips me up also.

No, since I'm Dutch and have a scientific background, metric units are not about to trip me up. I've used them all my life.

 

While I've only managed a few more caches since my last post in this thread, I can really attest there's all sorts of caches out there. In the 14 (working on #15 since I refuse to log the bloody thing as DNF) I've found so far there's been unintentional bushwacking, wading through nettles, climbing a steep hill, 2 "hidden in plain sight", having to climb a tree, having to be taller than 5'4 to reach it (thank god for tall dutchies), having to wiggle under a bike bridge on your belly like a snake, and a few "walk right up to it" caches.

 

I've found it's really important to read the cache page for anything the CO writes as well as the logs because then I know how to dress or who/what I should bring with me!

I often hunt down caches that I didn't originally plan to hunt when I set out on my trip. So my standard dress code for caching is long trousers. And caching tools, food and water are also part of my basic caching equipment.

[+edexter]

I see that the "newbie trying to learn" didn't try very hard, burning out of the game in 16 days having found 13 caches between 5/13/13 and 5/29/13 and nothing since...

[+cachepohl]

Since there are many circumstances that could stop us short from going caching, I don't think it's worth to dig this old thread out after that long time.

Personally, I hope he just lost interest as was not one going for a T5 beyond his capabilities ... you get the idea.

[ohgood]

I've just started caching. Couldn't find the first one on the first try. Went back the next day and found it. Got my GPS and found the second one right away. Failed to find the third one, but found the fourth without much trouble. Went back the next day and tried at length to locate number three and failed again. Today I tried for number five and failed. Went to lunch, went back armed with the extra hint and everyone's comments and still failed to find. That makes me 3 out of 5 so far. Is this normal, or am I just a newbie that's not very good?

 

we filter out:

micros

cachers with consistantly poor coordinates

 

and average 9/10 found vs didn't find because of it.

 

no need in kicking around in a circle for an hour just to find.... oh look, another micro with nothing but a log. ;-)