Groundspeak Forums: The Newest World Record - Groundspeak Forums

Jump to content

  • (9 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The Newest World Record 24 hour run

#1 User is offline   legoboyjj 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 31-March 04

Posted 06 November 2010 - 10:48 PM

Rain or Shine, Zsteve, Scubasonic & Legoboyjj
ET Highway Record Run
11/5/2010
1270 Finds

Hour 1: 24
Hour 2: 33
Hour 3: 30
Hour 4: 20
Hour 5: 32
Hour 6: 31
Hour 7: 0
Hour 8: 0
Hour 9: 4
Hour 10: 103
Hour 11: 96
Hour 12: 122
Hour 13: 68
Hour 14: 67
Hour 15: 110
Hour 16: 54 w/ break - let breaks cool down
Hour 17: 98
Hour 18:103
Hour 19: 111
Hour 20: 91
Hour 21: 66
Hour 22: 7
Hour 23: 0
Hour 24: 0
Total = 1270

21hours 45minutes caching and driving

ET Run & Alien Head plus 20 others in 11hours 45minutes

We started in Cedar City, Utah and ended the day in Tonopah, Nevada.

We could not have done this without the fifth member of our team Legoboy's 4 Runner. We had to take a short break at one point and slow
down a couple of times to allow the breaks to cool off as they were not doing the job.

This was a great area to visit with awesome landscapes and views.

We really appreciate all the cache hiders for all the work that went into placing these caches.

Can't wait for the next big power trail to come out.

-legoboyjj

#2 User is offline   terrkan78 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 574
  • Joined: 14-November 08

Posted 06 November 2010 - 11:37 PM

Major congrats to you crazy guys!!

#3 User is online   humboldt flier 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1377
  • Joined: 06-October 06

Posted 07 November 2010 - 12:11 AM

Oh oh,

Are you folks also the " owners " of the record run on the TOTG??

Who threw down a gauntlet? Tee, Hee, Hee, LOL

Duck, here come some flaming arrows.

Congrats

#4 User is offline   Pablo Mac 

  • Add to Watchlist
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 511
  • Joined: 31-May 04

Posted 07 November 2010 - 03:34 AM

Pablo Mac likes this.

#5 User is offline   Scubasonic 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1402
  • Joined: 12-August 03

Posted 07 November 2010 - 05:43 AM

It was a great experience now the logging begins, Thanks guys for a fun trip. Before the trip my best day was 123 in one day. :P

Scubasonic

#6 User is offline   family explorer 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 31-December 05

Posted 07 November 2010 - 06:51 AM

Congratulation guys. Our Oregon marathoners for distance and number running. Go TEAM BLUR. :P

#7 User is offline   Nicodemus3 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 54
  • Joined: 03-March 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 07:28 AM

Great job guys, have fun with the logs.

#8 User is offline   SwineFlew 

  • Nobody
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3009
  • Joined: 23-September 09

Posted 07 November 2010 - 08:03 AM

We knew you guys were crazy! Congrats!

#9 User is offline   Lil Devil 

  • GPX Spinner
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 5074
  • Joined: 26-June 01

Posted 07 November 2010 - 08:26 AM

I'm just glad someone relegated VK to second place :P

#10 User is offline   BaylorGrad 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 421
  • Joined: 02-June 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 09:49 AM

I'm inclined to believe that finding 122 caches per hour... Even on the ET Power Trail... Has to be impossible. That's one cache per slightly-under 30 seconds. If you just had to FIND the cache, that would be highly unlikely, but with the time it takes for EACH of you to sign the log?

I just don't think it's possible... Unless I'm missing something.

#11 User is offline   Scubasonic 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1402
  • Joined: 12-August 03

Posted 07 November 2010 - 10:17 AM

View PostBaylorGrad, on Nov 7 2010, 09:49 AM, said:

I'm inclined to not believe it,........Unless I'm missing something.


Ever heard of a stamp

SS

#12 User is offline   JohnnyVegas 

  • Back to school
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 5308
  • Joined: 05-January 03

Posted 07 November 2010 - 10:31 AM

View PostBaylorGrad, on Nov 7 2010, 09:49 AM, said:

I'm inclined to believe that finding 122 caches per hour... Even on the ET Power Trail... Has to be impossible. That's one cache per slightly-under 30 seconds. If you just had to FIND the cache, that would be highly unlikely, but with the time it takes for EACH of you to sign the log?

I just don't think it's possible... Unless I'm missing something.

I agree.
As I have sais in the past. These world record runs are BS. I guess they could be valid for some one that beleives in the tooth fairy. :P

#13 User is offline   KJcachers 

  • Eazy Peazy Lemon Squeezy
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 764
  • Joined: 31-October 07

Posted 07 November 2010 - 10:35 AM

sticker or stamp wit a single group name not each individual signing with pen or pencil. happens all the time when groups cache together.

#14 User is offline   Tequila 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 2972
  • Joined: 17-June 01

Posted 07 November 2010 - 10:47 AM

I would like to hear more about how you did it? The actual process.

For example, did all four cachers attend at each cache while it was found and signed? Did you sign/stamp the log book or use a sticker? Did you put the sticker on the log book or outside of the container?

How many miles? Any DNF's?

#15 User is offline   Ecylram 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1530
  • Joined: 25-June 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 10:59 AM

View PostTequila, on Nov 7 2010, 11:47 AM, said:

I would like to hear more about how you did it? The actual process.

For example, did all four cachers attend at each cache while it was found and signed? Did you sign/stamp the log book or use a sticker? Did you put the sticker on the log book or outside of the container?

How many miles? Any DNF's?

I believe the DNF question was answered in another thread, there were no DNF's for the Alien Trail portion of the caching. Scubasonic has said that a stamp was used.

We know there wasn't any leapfrogging as only one vehicle was used. At least one person would have to remain behind the driver's seat. My guess only one or two left the vehicle at each stopping point.

#16 User is offline   sdarken 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 459
  • Joined: 24-June 06

Posted 07 November 2010 - 11:08 AM

I'm curious. Did you set out for a world record run or did you just decide to try for it after starting. What happened between hours 7 and 9?

Hour 7: 0
Hour 8: 0
Hour 9: 4

Also, why is there such a big difference between hours 12 and 13?
Hour 12: 122
Hour 13: 68

#17 User is offline   Ecylram 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1530
  • Joined: 25-June 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 11:14 AM

View PostJohnnyVegas, on Nov 7 2010, 11:31 AM, said:

View PostBaylorGrad, on Nov 7 2010, 09:49 AM, said:

I'm inclined to believe that finding 122 caches per hour... Even on the ET Power Trail... Has to be impossible. That's one cache per slightly-under 30 seconds. If you just had to FIND the cache, that would be highly unlikely, but with the time it takes for EACH of you to sign the log?

I just don't think it's possible... Unless I'm missing something.

I agree.
As I have sais in the past. These world record runs are BS. I guess they could be valid for some one that beleives in the tooth fairy. :P

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)
* The driver remains behind the wheel
* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.
* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ
* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.
* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.
* Dive back into the car.
* Repeat ad nauseum

#18 User is offline   Cardinal Red 

  • I am not a Lab Rat
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 2560
  • Joined: 17-July 04

Posted 07 November 2010 - 11:17 AM

View PostJohnnyVegas, on Nov 7 2010, 01:31 PM, said:

View PostBaylorGrad, on Nov 7 2010, 09:49 AM, said:

I'm inclined to believe that finding 122 caches per hour... Even on the ET Power Trail... Has to be impossible. That's one cache per slightly-under 30 seconds. If you just had to FIND the cache, that would be highly unlikely, but with the time it takes for EACH of you to sign the log?

I just don't think it's possible... Unless I'm missing something.

I agree.
As I have sais in the past. These world record runs are BS. I guess they could be valid for some one that beleives in the tooth fairy. :P

Most early caching records used to be REAL caching and were interesting. Now they are just LAME.

#19 User is offline   Lil Devil 

  • GPX Spinner
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 5074
  • Joined: 26-June 01

Posted 07 November 2010 - 11:23 AM

View PostEcylram, on Nov 7 2010, 11:14 AM, said:

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)
* The driver remains behind the wheel
* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.
* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ
* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.
* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.
* Dive back into the car.
* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.

#20 User is offline   Klondike Mike 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 31-December 03

Posted 07 November 2010 - 11:51 AM

View Postlegoboyjj, on Nov 6 2010, 11:48 PM, said:

Rain or Shine, Zsteve, Scubasonic & Legoboyjj
ET Highway Record Run
11/5/2010
1270 Finds

21hours 45minutes caching and driving

ET Run & Alien Head plus 20 others in 11hours 45minutes
-legoboyjj



So what you are saying is you drove the Alien Head? :P

#21 User is offline   Tequila 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 2972
  • Joined: 17-June 01

Posted 07 November 2010 - 12:20 PM

View Postsdarken, on Nov 7 2010, 11:08 AM, said:

I'm curious. Did you set out for a world record run or did you just decide to try for it after starting. What happened between hours 7 and 9?

Hour 7: 0
Hour 8: 0
Hour 9: 4

Also, why is there such a big difference between hours 12 and 13?
Hour 12: 122
Hour 13: 68



Maybe they had to drive back to the start to refuel. No gas stations along the route.

#22 User is offline   2oldfarts (the rockhounders) 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3985
  • Joined: 13-March 03

Posted 07 November 2010 - 03:31 PM

Obviously the caches are hidden very well. :anibad:

Just how far from the pavement were they actually placed?

#23 User is offline   LaBamba 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 29-March 05

Posted 07 November 2010 - 06:58 PM

Great job boys! Rabid would describe it best. But I guess we always knew that. Long way to drive for an In and Out Burger. Good thing you where able to grab a few caches along the way. For those of you who question the numbers, I have cached plenty with Legoboy and ROS. While they could easily be described as "trouble", I have never seen anything but above board caching ethics out of these guys. Why bother? It would be beneath them to do it.

#24 User is offline   legoboyjj 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 31-March 04

Posted 07 November 2010 - 07:22 PM

View Postsdarken, on Nov 7 2010, 11:08 AM, said:

I'm curious. Did you set out for a world record run or did you just decide to try for it after starting. What happened between hours 7 and 9?

Hour 7: 0
Hour 8: 0
Hour 9: 4

Also, why is there such a big difference between hours 12 and 13?
Hour 12: 122
Hour 13: 68


We definitely planned to go for a personal record. After breaking the record on the TOTG run we thought we had a good shot here. I'm sure it will be broken at some point.

Hour 7-9 was our drive from Cedar City Utah to Ash Springs.

On Hour 13 we drove up the mine road and got the caches in Rachel and stopped for some pictures.

We brought 10 gallons of gas with us but I think we could have made it without. At a minimum we could have just taken one 5 gallon can.

#25 User is offline   legoboyjj 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 31-March 04

Posted 07 November 2010 - 07:30 PM

View PostTequila, on Nov 7 2010, 10:47 AM, said:

I would like to hear more about how you did it? The actual process.

For example, did all four cachers attend at each cache while it was found and signed? Did you sign/stamp the log book or use a sticker? Did you put the sticker on the log book or outside of the container?

How many miles? Any DNF's?


Most of the caches are within 30' of the car. We had a driver, two runners and a stamper(on the logs).

Not sure how many miles we covered as I forgot to check the odometer the next morning. As far as DNF's all of ET caches were in place including 2 we found at one location. Before that we got about 170 of the 200 in the musical series in Cedar City. Some of those we just chose not to do though.

#26 User is offline   legoboyjj 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 31-March 04

Posted 07 November 2010 - 07:31 PM

View PostKlondike Mike, on Nov 7 2010, 11:51 AM, said:

View Postlegoboyjj, on Nov 6 2010, 11:48 PM, said:

Rain or Shine, Zsteve, Scubasonic & Legoboyjj
ET Highway Record Run
11/5/2010
1270 Finds

21hours 45minutes caching and driving

ET Run & Alien Head plus 20 others in 11hours 45minutes
-legoboyjj



So what you are saying is you drove the Alien Head? :anibad:


Yes like many others we drove the same tracks left by previous cachers.

#27 User is offline   BaylorGrad 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 421
  • Joined: 02-June 10

Posted 07 November 2010 - 08:27 PM

You all provided some GREAT insight and explanations--I can't say I'd ever become a personal fan of "power-trailing," so I hadn't thought of many of these methods.

However, let's talk through this mathematically for a moment (and I hate math, so if I mess this up, someone help me out).

Let's focus on hour 12... 122 caches. Let's also assume that each cache is EXACTLY 528 feet apart from one another.

This means that they had to cover (528 x 121) 63,888 feet in one hour, which is 12.1 miles. They would have to be traveling an average of 12.1 mph to travel 12.1 miles in 1 hour.

NOT a huge deal at all, right?

Ok, now consider that they must stop (full-on stop) for every cache. Let's assume it takes 1 second to get to GZ, 1 second to find the cache, 2 seconds to open the cache and pull out the log, half a second to stamp the log, another 1 second to put the log back in the cache and close the lid, and another 1 second to get back in the car.

Sounds RIDICULOUSLY FAST, right? I agree. That's 6.5 seconds that the vehicle must be fully stopped. Even if they used the method suggested above (take each physical cache, and replace it at the next location), we'll subtract 1.5 seconds for efficiency's sake.

So at the absolute minimum, the vehicle must be stopped for 5 seconds. This also means that there's about 2 seconds of decelerating and accelerating, during which the vehicle is going LESS than 12.1 miles per hour.

I could continue, but I'll let someone else worry about that task. The point is... This is almost mathematically impossible...

#28 User is offline   ventura_kids 

  • Original Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1431
  • Joined: 11-September 01

Posted 07 November 2010 - 08:31 PM

Congratulations !!!! That's crazy fast. :anibad:

#29 User is offline   f0t0m0m 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 393
  • Joined: 26-May 03

Posted 07 November 2010 - 09:00 PM

Congratulation!!! I knew it was only a matter of time....

#30 User is offline   Mudfrog 

  • Premium MudCacher
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 2983
  • Joined: 27-March 02

Posted 07 November 2010 - 09:36 PM

View PostLil Devil, on Nov 7 2010, 01:23 PM, said:

View PostEcylram, on Nov 7 2010, 11:14 AM, said:

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)
* The driver remains behind the wheel
* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.
* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ
* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.
* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.
* Dive back into the car.
* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.


I know a couple of cachers who did most of the ET caches and they told me that they witnessed this when they made their trip. Another group of cachers passed them along the way and guess what happened? They came to their next unfound cache and found their names already in the log. :grin:

The way i see it, the physical logs are now pretty much worthless since they've been removed from the cache they were originally placed in. :anibad:
.

This post has been edited by Mudfrog: 07 November 2010 - 09:38 PM


#31 User is offline   NYPaddleCacher 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 8689
  • Joined: 08-January 07

Posted 07 November 2010 - 11:51 PM

View PostMudfrog, on Nov 7 2010, 09:36 PM, said:

View PostLil Devil, on Nov 7 2010, 01:23 PM, said:

View PostEcylram, on Nov 7 2010, 11:14 AM, said:

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)
* The driver remains behind the wheel
* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.
* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ
* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.
* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.
* Dive back into the car.
* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.


I know a couple of cachers who did most of the ET caches and they told me that they witnessed this when they made their trip. Another group of cachers passed them along the way and guess what happened? They came to their next unfound cache and found their names already in the log. :grin:

The way i see it, the physical logs are now pretty much worthless since they've been removed from the cache they were originally placed in. :anibad:
.


I'll have to admit, that's a clever logging technique. I do, however, have and issues with it.

It was my understanding that not all of the caches were the same size (though most were). So what happened a cache that was listed as a small was found and the previous find was a micro? Did seekers just ignore the cache owners size specification and replace it with whatever they had?

This is just yet another example of how those finding caches on a power trail are willing to "bend the rules" all in the name of finding as many caches as possible in a short period of time. I think that's my primary beef about power trails; that they provide an incentive for geocachers to ignore generally accepted practices. More and me it seems that there is one set of guidelines for "regular" geocaching and another for power trails.

#32 User is offline   SK6 Blue 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 18-May 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:36 AM

View PostMudfrog, on Nov 8 2010, 12:36 AM, said:

View PostLil Devil, on Nov 7 2010, 01:23 PM, said:

View PostEcylram, on Nov 7 2010, 11:14 AM, said:

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)
* The driver remains behind the wheel
* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.
* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ
* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.
* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.
* Dive back into the car.
* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.


I know a couple of cachers who did most of the ET caches and they told me that they witnessed this when they made their trip. Another group of cachers passed them along the way and guess what happened? They came to their next unfound cache and found their names already in the log. :grin:

The way i see it, the physical logs are now pretty much worthless since they've been removed from the cache they were originally placed in. :anibad:
.


all the more reason as a CO to label the log sheet[and/or inside of the cache container] ...

I must say those are some amazing numbers, CONGRATS... but i honestly dont doubt them being possible.... the car never has to fully stop, pickup trucks/ fullsize vans are made for jumping in/out of on the run... i've never had the chance to try to run a real power trail , but i had a hell of a similar experience on a sudo power trail that was recently published along an interesting "dirt road"[basicly ATV trail] while trying to snag FTFs on them all ..its amazing the avg speed you can do when you get into a Rhythm.

yet again, CONGRATS!

#33 User is offline   JohnnyVegas 

  • Back to school
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 5308
  • Joined: 05-January 03

Posted 08 November 2010 - 07:29 AM

View PostEcylram, on Nov 7 2010, 11:14 AM, said:

View PostJohnnyVegas, on Nov 7 2010, 11:31 AM, said:

View PostBaylorGrad, on Nov 7 2010, 09:49 AM, said:

I'm inclined to believe that finding 122 caches per hour... Even on the ET Power Trail... Has to be impossible. That's one cache per slightly-under 30 seconds. If you just had to FIND the cache, that would be highly unlikely, but with the time it takes for EACH of you to sign the log?

I just don't think it's possible... Unless I'm missing something.

I agree.
As I have sais in the past. These world record runs are BS. I guess they could be valid for some one that beleives in the tooth fairy. :anibad:

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)
* The driver remains behind the wheel
* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.
* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ
* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.
* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.
* Dive back into the car.
* Repeat ad nauseum

Driver stays in car. then driver should not get credit for the find, driver did not look for the cache
All the people in the group get out and look for the cache, those that do not look do not get credit for the find.

#34 User is offline   briansnat 

  • Eight time US Geocacher of the Year
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 38099
  • Joined: 14-September 01

Posted 08 November 2010 - 07:44 AM

View PostMudfrog, on Nov 8 2010, 12:36 AM, said:

View PostLil Devil, on Nov 7 2010, 01:23 PM, said:

View PostEcylram, on Nov 7 2010, 11:14 AM, said:

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)
* The driver remains behind the wheel
* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.
* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ
* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.
* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.
* Dive back into the car.
* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.


I know a couple of cachers who did most of the ET caches and they told me that they witnessed this when they made their trip. Another group of cachers passed them along the way and guess what happened? They came to their next unfound cache and found their names already in the log. :grin:

The way i see it, the physical logs are now pretty much worthless since they've been removed from the cache they were originally placed in. :anibad:
.


Moving caches to another location? Doesn't sound like the geocaching I know.

#35 User is offline   Ecylram 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1530
  • Joined: 25-June 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 07:56 AM

View PostJohnnyVegas, on Nov 8 2010, 08:29 AM, said:

Driver stays in car. then driver should not get credit for the find, driver did not look for the cache
All the people in the group get out and look for the cache, those that do not look do not get credit for the find.

I don't know if I agree or disagree, I'll have to give it some thought. I do know that speed caching will always draw criticism as everyone has a different definition of what tactics should/shouldn't be allowed.

Playing devil's advocate...

With regular geocaching, it's common for several individuals to cache as a group and when one finds the cache they to take credit for the find. (Some groups wait until everybody has found it.) Sometimes it's found before everybody even makes it to the GZ. This draws very little controversy.

With regular geocaching, it's common for a team to sign for the team. I see it all the time in logs around here. They use one sticker or stamp instead of several. This seems to be a generally accepted practice.

For a speed caching team, the driver is an integral part of the find. As they are needed to identify each GZ and pull as close to it as possible.

Therefore...

It seems reasonable that speed cachers include the driver who is only a few feet away and was integral to getting them to the find.

This post has been edited by Ecylram: 08 November 2010 - 07:58 AM


#36 User is offline   Scubasonic 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1402
  • Joined: 12-August 03

Posted 08 November 2010 - 08:17 AM

Most of the time on this ET run, the driver found the cache before we did he could see it right away as we were driving up to it, so in essence he found the cache...... there is no difference IMO so he didn't get out of the car so what. When group caching and 1 person finds it while everyone is looking the finder just signs everyone's name in this instance a stamp was used, and you move on to the next cache. Totally disagree with JonnyVegas, he seems to find anything wrong with anyone speed caching on the ET Highway, but lives closer then anyone and hasn't even done it.

Scubasonic

Scubasonic

#37 User is offline   2oldfarts (the rockhounders) 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3985
  • Joined: 13-March 03

Posted 08 November 2010 - 08:34 AM

Evil thought!!!

What would happen if someone would go along the route, check to see what type of cache container is used and then would go get several hundred identical containers and go back to the route and add 8 to 10 containers at several of the "cache" locations? Would the people doing the power trail check to see which one actually had the log or would they just grab 1 and go? :grin: :anibad:

#38 User is offline   geodarts 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3275
  • Joined: 08-February 04

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:59 AM

View PostScubasonic, on Nov 8 2010, 08:17 AM, said:

Most of the time on this ET run, the driver found the cache before we did he could see it right away as we were driving up to it, so in essence he found the cache......


It is not like much looking is required for any of the caches along the ET highway. I doubt if teams have said, "You check underneath the little rock by the road marker that you can see when driving up that is exactly the same as hundreds of other hides that we have found and I will look in the bush for a hanging bison with camo tape on it." For the few caches that I did, on average, it took me 18-30 seconds to get out of the car, sign the log, and get back in. For the most part, I doubt if everyone gets out of the car for each cache. It would slow things down too much.

So as far as I am concerned, as soon as the verifications and drug test results arrive, this total can be added to the official record books.

View Postbriansnat, on Nov 8 2010, 07:44 AM, said:

Moving caches to another location? Doesn't sound like the geocaching I know.


A lot of things out there are not geocaching as you know.

This post has been edited by mulvaney: 08 November 2010 - 10:14 AM


#39 User is offline   two bison 

  • Browsing for caches.
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: 14-August 04

Posted 08 November 2010 - 09:59 AM

View Post2oldfarts (the rockhounders), on Nov 8 2010, 09:34 AM, said:

Evil thought!!!

What would happen if someone would go along the route, check to see what type of cache container is used and then would go get several hundred identical containers and go back to the route and add 8 to 10 containers at several of the "cache" locations? Would the people doing the power trail check to see which one actually had the log or would they just grab 1 and go? :grin: :anibad:


They'd know before they got to the next stop ... 528 feet away.

#40 User is offline   Lil Devil 

  • GPX Spinner
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 5074
  • Joined: 26-June 01

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:00 AM

View PostEcylram, on Nov 8 2010, 07:56 AM, said:

View PostJohnnyVegas, on Nov 8 2010, 08:29 AM, said:

Driver stays in car. then driver should not get credit for the find, driver did not look for the cache
All the people in the group get out and look for the cache, those that do not look do not get credit for the find.

For a speed caching team, the driver is an integral part of the find. As they are needed to identify each GZ and pull as close to it as possible.

Therefore...

It seems reasonable that speed cachers include the driver who is only a few feet away and was integral to getting them to the find.

When I go caching with a group of friends, I'm often the driver. While I usually get out and aid in the search, there are times I don't because I'm busy planning which cache to head to next, or I'm taking a snack break, or whatever. My personal rule for myself in these situations is I need to see the cache or it's hiding area. Usually I can see it in someone's hand, as they sign it, from the car from 50 feet away, so I'm happy. If the cache is a significant distance from the car, down some trails in the woods, I'll get out and go aid in the search.

One has to remember that if another person logs online for a cache they didn't really find, that person is only cheating him/herself. There is no awards, so it shouldn't matter to anybody else.

Edit for clarification.

This post has been edited by Lil Devil: 08 November 2010 - 10:01 AM


#41 User is offline   Clan Riffster 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 9217
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:00 AM

View PostLil Devil, on Nov 7 2010, 02:23 PM, said:

Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed.

Please tell me this is sarcasm. :anibad:
How can anyone justify moving a cache 528'?
Or worse, moving over a thousand caches 528'?
We've seen folks vilified in these forums for moving a cache just a few feet, because the seeker thought their hiding spot was better than the one selected by the hider. For the most part, I've agreed with those condemnations. Now we're changing our collective minds on moving someone else's cache, so long as record setting is involved? I'm envisioning a scenario where someone seeks out the Alien Head series, (way kewl series, by the way), and samples a few of the ET caches nearby, claiming to have found ET 251, or whatever number is closest. The next time a run like this is made on the ET series, their signature is no longer on the log for 251. Eventually, the cache they found will migrate so far up the trail that they will have no way to verify which cache they found.

I've seen some pretty sad behavior done in the name of record setting, (in other activities), but I never thought folks would be so crass in this game that they'd pull a stunt like this. I get the whole competition thing. I really do. And for the most part, I'm pretty neutral about it. If folks are having fun, zipping from film can to film can, and they're not harming anyone else in the process, I say let 'em at it. Not my cup of tea, but then folks who are wrapped up in numbers runs probably wouldn't enjoy wading 6 hours through a swamp just to find one ammo can. We all play this game in the manner that we find most enjoyable. But the wholesale moving of caches is, to me, deplorable. :grin:

#42 User is offline   Harry Dolphin 

  • Major Porpoise
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 8076
  • Joined: 03-July 04

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:01 AM

View Postbriansnat, on Nov 8 2010, 07:44 AM, said:

View PostMudfrog, on Nov 8 2010, 12:36 AM, said:

View PostLil Devil, on Nov 7 2010, 01:23 PM, said:

View PostEcylram, on Nov 7 2010, 11:14 AM, said:

For the doubting thomases (not necessarily a bad thing), Speed Caching goes something like this:

* By car, the caches are only a few seconds apart (around 528 feet)
* The driver remains behind the wheel
* Likely cache locations are spottable from 200-300 feet away.
* Vehicle parks within a few feet of the GZ
* One or two people run out of the vehicle to the likely GZ.
* Film canister is opened, log stamped in (probably) sloppy fashion. Restuffed, capped & replaced.
* Dive back into the car.
* Repeat ad nauseum

I've talked to several people who have done the caches on the E.T. Highway. From what I've heard, the descriptions above are mostly accurate, except for the signing (or stamping) the log part. Most teams will take the whole cache at the first stop, and go. They'll stamp the log while in transit to the next cache. When the 2nd cache is found, they take it and leave the cache they have already signed. Then they move on to the 3rd cache, again signing the previous cache while in transit. This goes on and on.

So what about that now missing #1 cache? Everyone already knows what the containers are, so they brought a new cache with them to place there. Either that, or if the team is returning home past #1 again, they might leave the last cache there.


I know a couple of cachers who did most of the ET caches and they told me that they witnessed this when they made their trip. Another group of cachers passed them along the way and guess what happened? They came to their next unfound cache and found their names already in the log. :grin:

The way i see it, the physical logs are now pretty much worthless since they've been removed from the cache they were originally placed in. :anibad:
.


Moving caches to another location? Doesn't sound like the geocaching I know.


Sounds like 1270 throw down caches to me.

#43 User is offline   two bison 

  • Browsing for caches.
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: 14-August 04

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:01 AM

To see how it works go to EMC of Northridge's blog and watch the video in the Conquering the Aliens post.

http://emcofnorthridge.wordpress.com/

This post has been edited by two bison: 08 November 2010 - 10:03 AM


#44 User is offline   Lil Devil 

  • GPX Spinner
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 5074
  • Joined: 26-June 01

Posted 08 November 2010 - 10:07 AM

View Posttwo bison, on Nov 8 2010, 10:01 AM, said:

To see how it works go to EMC of Northridge's blog and watch the video in the Conquering the Aliens post.

http://emcofnorthridge.wordpress.com/


Quote

Our technique of switching caches and stickering while in between was suggested by the cache owner, and many teams have chosen that method here.

:anibad:

#45 User is offline   addisonbr 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1766
  • Joined: 21-April 02

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:05 AM

View Postlegoboyjj, on Nov 7 2010, 07:31 PM, said:

View PostKlondike Mike, on Nov 7 2010, 11:51 AM, said:

So what you are saying is you drove the Alien Head? :anibad:
Yes like many others we drove the same tracks left by previous cachers.
That's a tough call, I think. This is the note on the description for the first cache in the series (assuming I have the right series):

Head Alien #1 GC253ZN said:

Please don't drive to these caches. The extraterrestrial visitors might take this as a threat. We think it will be safe if we tread lightly and walk to the landing sites. Have fun and keep your eye to the sky!

For driving tracks to develop is pretty interesting.

#46 User is offline   sbell111 

  • Charter Member
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 20567
  • Joined: 04-June 01

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:23 AM

View PostBaylorGrad, on Nov 7 2010, 10:27 PM, said:

I could continue, but I'll let someone else worry about that task. The point is... This is almost mathematically impossible...

Another name for 'almost mathematically impossible' is 'possible'.

#47 User is offline   sbell111 

  • Charter Member
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 20567
  • Joined: 04-June 01

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:32 AM

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!


In my opinion, it is appropriate to call one of these runs a 'world record' if standard rules were applied to the run. However, moving the cache and signing the log while enroute to the next cache would violate these standard rules. Therefore, these types of runs should not be considered by the community to be 'world records'. The reason that I take this stance is because it would be impossible for a team that did utilize standard geocaching practices (hide the cache like you found it, for example) to match the speeds that can be acquired by a team that merely swaps one cache container for another at ground zero, rather than taking the time to open the cache, remove the log, and sticker/stamp the log.

Similar to the run in which the outside of the cache containers were sharpied instead of the logs signed, these record runs should not be accepted by the community.

This post has been edited by sbell111: 08 November 2010 - 11:51 AM


#48 User is offline   bramasoleiowa 

  • Gigantopithecus Americanus Hunter
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 768
  • Joined: 11-December 08

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:47 AM

Congrats Scubasonic & gang!

The ET Trail may be "boring" "throw down" caches "focused towards raising your numbers" as described by some cachers, but I've found when group caching it is all about who you are with that makes the day fun, even on the LPCs, GRCs, and RPCs.
Glad to see you guys had a fun day of caching.

#49 User is offline   Ecylram 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1530
  • Joined: 25-June 10

Posted 08 November 2010 - 11:48 AM

View Postsbell111, on Nov 8 2010, 12:32 PM, said:

Caution!!! Puritan viewpoint ahead!!!

:anibad: That cracked me up. I haven't seen that term used in days. :grin:

I wonder if there would be any interest to establish UNOFFICIAL speed caching guidelines to cut down on the disagreements as to what is a legitimate tactic.

#50 User is offline   the4dirtydogs 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 999
  • Joined: 14-March 07

Posted 08 November 2010 - 12:03 PM

View Posttwo bison, on Nov 8 2010, 10:01 AM, said:

To see how it works go to EMC of Northridge's blog and watch the video in the Conquering the Aliens post.

http://emcofnorthridge.wordpress.com/

That is just wrong. I can't believe they did that. What a JOKE.

Share this topic:


  • (9 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic