Statistics for most founds per day and most favorite points per day

Question

1. Query for most founds per day

To find most popular caches this one is different from "most logged caches" because there is maybe a ten year old cache with 2000 Founds and a two year old cache with 1500 Founds. The later one is far more popular.

2. Query for  most favorite points per day?

This query differs from Favorite Points percentage because of the same reason. Or is the age of a cache included in the wilson formula?

Answer 1

For the first, it's not ideal, but you could set a date range for the 'Top Logged Caches', which will effectively neutralise the advantage older caches have, of being available for longer. It would be a good stat to have though, I agree.

Not quite sure why you'd want the second one, as there's already the 'FP by %', which provides a very good indication of quality. In that respect, what is the difference between a ten year old cache with 2000 Finds (50% FP) and a two year old cache with 1500 Finds (50% FP)?

Comments

What is the difference between a two year old traditional cache with 1500 Founds of which 1000 are Premiums and 500 Favorites (50% FP) and a five year old mystery cache with 20 Founds of which 10 are Premiums and 5 Favorites (50% FP)?
The first one is obviously easy and good, the last one hard to manage or to reach (20 Founds in five years), but also not bad.
For example, how to find caches of the category "easy and good"?

---

Is the number of find realy a good parameter to look at for a quality cache?
I looked at the top 100 logged caches in Sweden a except 10 of them are in the centre of the three largest cities and the rest on tourist spots and nice stops along big highways.  The trend is probably the same in if you look at regions or counties.
The only real difference you find out with most finds per day is how good the location of the cache is. Good in the scene that many cachers visits it. Easy to walk to in a city centre or in a tourist place.
The quality of the cant really be determinate that way.
A high numbers of find per day will probably give a hight value to new caches in a central location because there is often a high number of finds the firs day of the life of a cache. Or caches released at an event the will get may logs the fist day. The same for number of FP per day. But I don't thins that list is better then the wilson score.
There is a PGC function that almost does something like this called "Whats hot" It looks at numbers of finds and mainly number if FP given to the cache in the near past


The example you have both 50% FP , 500FP and 10FP
They will get a different wilson. The cache with 500 FP will get a higher value. Age are not a part of the wilson formula only number of FP and number of premium logs. If age should be a part of the formula the thing to include is probably to give a higher score to a caches that have premium logs before the FP system was introduced in December 2010 because i suspect few people looked back at al old caches and added FP
I suspect that the correct parameter difference on those two caches will be D and/or T. I would be really surprised the exist caches like that with caches that have the same geographical conditions as mention above and similar DT.
You almost says that in you conclusion when you says that 500 FP is easy and the 5 FP is hard. That will mean that the first has low D and T and the second had high D and/or T and you can filter on that. But i would suspect that your
But i would not agree that 10 FP cache is only not bad is suspect is is really good expertly if it is field pussel cache.

The last question "For example, how to find caches of the category "easy and good"?" is really a hard question. If easy includes quick to log look at low DT caches and primary at trads because myst/multi often take more time. To find a good cache look mainly at the wilson score. The harder part is how easy/fast can i reach the cache. That depends of if you are walking, cycling, car etc. and if there exist parking nereby? traffic etc. That is hard to answer without looking at a map. You can always filter on relevant attributes but they might be missing even if appropriate.

---

Thanks for you detailed answer. I think you're right. It depends on DT combinations. I think the given tools are already good enough.