>From: Scott Sparks <scottsparks1@mchsi.com>
>>-Rob (Wily Javelina)
>
>I don't put much stock in cache ratings.  I seldom even look at them except 
>when the description seems unusually difficult.  The reason is because 
>there is always somebody who thinks they're ''all that'' and that first 
>cache that they just hid deserves a five-star difficulty rating when, in 
>reality, it's maybe a 1.5 or 2. Then there are those who spend their free 
>time hanging upside down from cliffs and such and they figure the 12 mile 
>trek to the cache they hid on top of a sheer rock out-cropping is ''just a 
>measly ol' 1 or 1.5'' when, for the average Joe (or JoAnne), it's a true 
>5/5.  I rank caches that I hunt for as follows:  If I find 'em in the first 
>few minutes,  they're easy.  If I can't find them at all, or it takes me 
>several attempts and a couple sleepless nights, I call them difficult. ;-)


Sprocket is right on with his comments. That is very true. The ratings on 
caches often times are way off. I have made many grueling hikes to cache 
that were rated only a 2.5 terrain while others are a 'walk in the park' and 
were rated a 4.5 terrain!

Take Bronco Butte Cache for instance (GCC7A)... it was rated a 5 for 
terrain. Now anyone who understands how the ratings work knows you CANNOT 
rate a cache with a terrain rating of 5 unless it REQUIRES special 
equiptment to get to it. They guy who hid Bronco Butte Cache did it with a 
helicopter. He is a low find cacher. But, thought he was hiding the hardest 
cache in Arizona when he hid that cache. He thought there was no way up 
there without a helicopter. Turns out there is a fairly decent trail all the 
way up the mountain. Quit frankly.. I thought Lost Ark Cache (now archived) 
was a MUCH harder hike than Bronco Butte. At least Bronco Butte had a trail! 
I would have given Bronco Butte a 4. Lost Ark a 4.5.  But, neither can have 
a 5, because it only requires a hike to get to either one. I can name a few 
caches right off the top of my head that are more difficult than Bronco 
Butte (Picketpost: Summit comes to mind as one I just did recently). Also, 
look at the difficulty rating of Bronco Butte... the difficulty rating is 
based on how hard it is to find the cache once at the coordinates (correct 
me if I am wrong on that). Bronco Butte was given a 4. It was very easy to 
find. Just had to hike up there to find it! :) There was no where to hide 
it! Anyone walking by would have seen it. I wouldnt give it more than a 1.5 
for diff.

Interesting side fact.. We are still the last team to visit Bronco Butte WAY 
back on June 9th, 2002!!!!  Come one people, get out of the city a bit more 
and smell some real wildflowers!!! :) :) :)

So, with all this said and what Sprocket said.. the rating arent worth a 
hill of beans. As I said in my last post... I think the number of finds is 
the most accurate ranking... you have to be a well rounded cacher to get to 
the top of the rankings. Gotta do those urban caches and you gotta do some 
hiking and climbing with the wilderness caches.

Scott
Team Ropingthewind

_________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE online virus check for your PC here, from McAfee. 
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963