| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
minnstars
Geocacher
Joined: 18 Sep 2008
Posts: 298
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:59 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I looked at roughly a 40 mile circle around the Twin Cities Metro area using my MN database updated within the last week. This is what I got:
6,380 - Traditionals = 82%
1,150 - Puzzles = 15%
200 - Multi-Caches = 3%
80 - Other Cache Types = 1%
7,810 – Total = 100%
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bflentje
Geocacher
Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 3652
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am not anti-puzzle. But I think that 15% is way too high. I'd like to see that number drop to below 10%.
But I know in just typing this, there are those now lining up new puzzle caches.. sigh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WestSideDaddy
MnGCA Board
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Posts: 541
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bflentje wrote: |
I am not anti-puzzle. But I think that 15% is way too high. I'd like to see that number drop to below 10%.
But I know in just typing this, there are those now lining up new puzzle caches.. sigh. |
What is your criteria for wanting it to be 10% ? What is the significance of that number? Do you think that multis at 3% is good?
Also, does that differentiate between puzzles vs. challenges in the "?" category? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
minnstars
Geocacher
Joined: 18 Sep 2008
Posts: 298
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| WestSideDaddy wrote: |
What is your criteria for wanting it to be 10%? What is the significance of that number? Do you think that multis at 3% is good?
Also, does that differentiate between puzzles vs. challenges in the "?" category? |
I was actually surprised that it was only 15%, but if I tighten the circle to more like 25 to 30 miles I get closer to 20% Puzzles. 
I agree that the number of Multi-Caches is sad. Only 40 Multi-caches have been placed in the metro area in the past year vs. 375 puzzles.
The answer is no I just counted "?" in the 1,150 = 15%. There are 210 challenge caches in the mix, so true puzzles are 940 = 12%. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJnTJ
Geocacher
Joined: 23 Aug 2010
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks for compiling those stats, minnstars. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ST11
Geocacher
Joined: 04 Jul 2009
Posts: 153
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I find all these calculations and statistics very puzzling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bflentje
Geocacher
Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 3652
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| WestSideDaddy wrote: |
| bflentje wrote: |
I am not anti-puzzle. But I think that 15% is way too high. I'd like to see that number drop to below 10%.
But I know in just typing this, there are those now lining up new puzzle caches.. sigh. |
What is your criteria for wanting it to be 10% ? What is the significance of that number? Do you think that multis at 3% is good?
Also, does that differentiate between puzzles vs. challenges in the "?" category? |
My criteria? It is this.. personal preference. At one time I was an avid puzzler and now I hardly find the time to put into it. With lack of time, it's tough to see so many densely placed question marks. I'd prefer to see more multicaches (short and sweet).
Again, just my personal preference. I cache where the caches are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WestSideDaddy
MnGCA Board
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Posts: 541
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bflentje wrote: |
| WestSideDaddy wrote: |
| bflentje wrote: |
I am not anti-puzzle. But I think that 15% is way too high. I'd like to see that number drop to below 10%.
But I know in just typing this, there are those now lining up new puzzle caches.. sigh. |
What is your criteria for wanting it to be 10% ? What is the significance of that number? Do you think that multis at 3% is good?
Also, does that differentiate between puzzles vs. challenges in the "?" category? |
My criteria? It is this.. personal preference. At one time I was an avid puzzler and now I hardly find the time to put into it. With lack of time, it's tough to see so many densely placed question marks. I'd prefer to see more multicaches (short and sweet).
Again, just my personal preference. I cache where the caches are. |
I didn't mean that question as a personal attack (apologies if it was taken that way). I was just wondering what is magic about that percentage of puzzles that made you want it.
To me, it's a function more of the total number of new caches. If there are enough (in volume) of new traditional then the absolute % of traditional to puzzle seems less important.
It just struck me as a very explicit definition of something that didn't seem to be derived on any hard specific requirements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bflentje
Geocacher
Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 3652
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| WestSideDaddy wrote: |
| bflentje wrote: |
| WestSideDaddy wrote: |
| bflentje wrote: |
I am not anti-puzzle. But I think that 15% is way too high. I'd like to see that number drop to below 10%.
But I know in just typing this, there are those now lining up new puzzle caches.. sigh. |
What is your criteria for wanting it to be 10% ? What is the significance of that number? Do you think that multis at 3% is good?
Also, does that differentiate between puzzles vs. challenges in the "?" category? |
My criteria? It is this.. personal preference. At one time I was an avid puzzler and now I hardly find the time to put into it. With lack of time, it's tough to see so many densely placed question marks. I'd prefer to see more multicaches (short and sweet).
Again, just my personal preference. I cache where the caches are. |
I didn't mean that question as a personal attack (apologies if it was taken that way). I was just wondering what is magic about that percentage of puzzles that made you want it.
To me, it's a function more of the total number of new caches. If there are enough (in volume) of new traditional then the absolute % of traditional to puzzle seems less important.
It just struck me as a very explicit definition of something that didn't seem to be derived on any hard specific requirements. |
I wasn't offended. I thought 15% was too high so I pulled a significantly smaller number out of my.. thoughts. I suppose if puzzlers didn't go out of their way to make the next hardest puzzle ever, I'd have a different opinion. For me it just got to be too much. And to clarify, you can see from my stats that I've done a fair amount of puzzling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WestSideDaddy
MnGCA Board
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Posts: 541
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bflentje wrote: |
I wasn't offended. I thought 15% was too high so I pulled a significantly smaller number out of my.. thoughts. I suppose if puzzlers didn't go out of their way to make the next hardest puzzle ever, I'd have a different opinion. For me it just got to be too much. And to clarify, you can see from my stats that I've done a fair amount of puzzling. |
I think you mean the "next more harderest puzzle ever" 
I've hidden some, solved some and failed miserably with some. It does seem that either they are getting more difficult or maybe (less likely) I am getting less smarter.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
minnstars
Geocacher
Joined: 18 Sep 2008
Posts: 298
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bflentje wrote: |
My criteria? It is this.. personal preference. At one time I was an avid puzzler and now I hardly find the time to put into it. With lack of time, it's tough to see so many densely placed question marks. I'd prefer to see more multicaches (short and sweet).
Again, just my personal preference. I cache where the caches are. |
I personally enjoy puzzles because of the challenge of creating & solving them, but I will admit it can be time consuming. There is a small, but very robust puzzle community in the Twin Cities. It's quite amazing to see the level of creativity that goes into some of these puzzles. I can think of few human endeavors where people use more of their mental abilities than this.
Having said all that the real question is do puzzle caches in any way impact the number of traditional or Multicaches being published, regardless of the percentages. The majority of puzzle hides are micros hidden on road signs, or similar PnG's. From a pure geocaching standpoint I don't think these hides are taking away much real estate. I guess one could argue that the energy hiders are putting into puzzles caches could be directed toward traditional & Multi's. But the fact is there are not that many parks or public places left in the metro area where you can execute a nice traditional or Multi hide. On the other hand there is an almost endless supply of stop signs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pfalstad
Geocacher
Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 963
Location: Edina
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bflentje wrote: |
| My criteria? It is this.. personal preference. At one time I was an avid puzzler and now I hardly find the time to put into it. With lack of time, it's tough to see so many densely placed question marks. |
I'll admit it's gotten a little ridiculous. Before I liked to solve them all myself, now I team up with other cachers to solve many of them. But it's more fun that way anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
timewellspent
Geocacher
Joined: 19 Mar 2008
Posts: 659
Location: Chanhassen, MN
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pfalstad wrote: |
| I'll admit it's gotten a little ridiculous. Before I liked to solve them all myself, now I team up with other cachers to solve many of them. But it's more fun that way anyway. |
How does one apply to be on the pfalstad puzzle solving team?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
minnstars
Geocacher
Joined: 18 Sep 2008
Posts: 298
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| timewellspent wrote: |
| pfalstad wrote: |
| I'll admit it's gotten a little ridiculous. Before I liked to solve them all myself, now I team up with other cachers to solve many of them. But it's more fun that way anyway. |
How does one apply to be on the pfalstad puzzle solving team? |
+1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bflentje
Geocacher
Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 3652
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| timewellspent wrote: |
| pfalstad wrote: |
| I'll admit it's gotten a little ridiculous. Before I liked to solve them all myself, now I team up with other cachers to solve many of them. But it's more fun that way anyway. |
How does one apply to be on the pfalstad puzzle solving team? |
The best we can hope for is a 3rd Biennial FSUNoles Puzzle Event. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
User list
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
