[Az-Geocaching] Re: Team Rankings

[Scott Sparks]

Rob wrote:

>...
>Personally, I would like to see the top team ranked in terms
>of Score. I think that it gives a more well-rounded view of
>a teams ability. Of course that is only my opinion. What do
>the rest of you folks think?

>-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. ;-) 

On a related note, if you click on any of the categories on the AZ Stats page, it will sort by that category so, if you want, you can sort by ''Score'' or any other parameter. The only drawback is, it will reverse the order (high-to-low or low-to-high) each time so you may have to click a category twice to see the top rankings in that category. By coincidence, the top 5 AZ cachers by caches Found and by Score happen to be the same teams.

-- Sprocket