Ditto - team CARMEL does the same thing, we are enjoying it, not looking 
at the numbers.  We like taking the grandkids out for some fun and fresh 
air.
Mel

Robert & Linda Smith wrote:

> Guess I better jump into this fray..
>
> Most of the time my wife and I cache together and have do so for about 
> 85 percent of our small count of 200 finds.  There has been a time or 
> three that I went out on my own or with my brother, wanted to 
> introduce him, and made some finds.  Evey met a fellow cacher a time 
> or two at about the same time as we each walked up on the cache.  This 
> style of caching and posting meets our description of fun and 
> exercise.   We will never hit the high number of some people and we 
> don't mind if some others tag alone with us or we with them.  Our game 
> is fun for us and I would be the last one to say you better not cache 
> with more than you allotted number of cachers or you need to invent a 
> new name.  If our style works for us I hope the rest of the community 
> will allow us to continue enjoying the way we do it for our team.
>
> Bob Smith, Team Petite Elite, Prescott, AZ
>
> Jim Scotti wrote:
>
>> The only trouble here is that on most teams, the entire team does not 
>> always
>> participate in the hunt.  In my case, I'd say something like 80-90% 
>> of our
>> finds are by me hunting solo.  I usually mention in my log if any of 
>> the rest
>> of my family was helping or even just tagging along (or even just 
>> sitting
>> back in the car while I ran off the last 0.15 miles to find the 
>> cache).  I
>> suspect the majority of "teams" are one primary, more motivated 
>> cacher with
>> the occasional assistant(s).  I suspect that even some teams that 
>> often take
>> their kids along still hunt solo as often as not.  What is your 
>> percentage of
>> solo hunts, Dirk (aka ShadowAce)?  You probably take your kids 
>> (especially
>> that "cache fiend" son of yours! :-) ) along on the hunt more than 
>> any other
>> cacher I know.  Heck, you probably take your buddy Dave of Cow Spots 
>> along on
>> almost as many, I bet!  :-)
>>
>> Jim.
>>
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 SSpackeen@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>  
>>
>>>
>>> Speaking of "teams," any thoughts as to the merits of handling 
>>> "team"  statistics separately from "individual" statistics...
>>>
>>> As a solo cacher, I have personally turned every stone, printed 
>>> every map,  driven every cul-de-sac, fetched every new battery, 
>>> handled every trinket,  singed every log, etc.  Never had a second 
>>> set of eyes.  Never had  someone find caches for me while I was 
>>> absent, never had someone else log  my finds on the site.  Never had 
>>> any assistance in finding my claims,  period.
>>>
>>> Teamwork is easier!  I believe it is MUCH easier for teams to find 
>>> a  given set of 25 caches than for an individual to do so. 
>>> SO - I'd like to ask how other soloers out there feel about the  
>>> "pureness" of team statistics as opposted to individual stats. 
>>> It's my contention that geocaching.com should separate users into 
>>> two  groups - teams and individuals.  Just make that part of the 
>>> profile that is  visible to registered users and might be an 
>>> interesting comparison item for some  users...  Any thoughts?
>>>
>>> [...SkooterMan...]
>>>
>>> In a message dated 2/19/2005 5:33:43 P.M. US Mountain Standard 
>>> Time,  barbers5@cox.net writes:
>>>
>>> I wanted to get more  information about Geocaching teams.  What are 
>>> they, what do they  do?  How would I find more information about 
>>> them in the Tucson  area?
>>>
>>> Thanks for the  help,
>>>
>>> GB
>>>
>>> Jim Scotti
>>> Lunar & Planetary Laboratory
>>> University of Arizona
>>> Tucson, AZ 85721 USA                 
>>> http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/   
>>>   
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv@azgeocaching.com
> To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
> http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>
> Arizona's Geocaching Resource
> http://www.azgeocaching.com
>
>