My path to the Travelers Century Club continues. A layover (it counts!) in Dublin allowed me to add a country for the first time since 2009. 68 to go!
Saturday, July 23, 2016
Friday, July 22, 2016
Scotland's UEFA Coefficient: Third-Round Preview
Well, I guess I should be glad there's a third round to preview.
Second-Round Review
After I said, "Celtic has no business being in Europe if they can't dispatch these guys handily," Celtic went to Gibraltar and...lost. Oh, boy.
Well it was time for what this blog is (not actually) known for: on-the-scene (sort of) reporting. I was going to be in the UK for the return leg, so I planed to go...to a Celtic pub. The usual one was all the way across town, so I envisioned an epic walk across Bristol followed by watching the game among throngs of rabid Celtic supporters. By Wednesday, however, I was pretty tired, so I was very grateful to find out that the Celtic supporters were watching at a pub kinda near my hotel. Oh, and the sound wasn't going to be on because it was pub quiz night. Well, anyway, it was a place to have a pint of Guinness and watch with...I'm guessing three Celtic supporters. Celtic scored three goals in rapid succession to put things away, and I left before the pub quizzers showed up. The loss in Gibraltar, I'll remind, knocks 0.25 off the coefficient (compared to a win) for a five-year-period.
For Hibs, I said, "I don't hold out much hope here, but it would be nice to see Hibs grab 0.125 or even 0.25, even if they don't advance." They almost advanced! They let in a goal in the first minute of the first leg, then held Brøndby scoreless for 209 minutes. And then lost in penalties. Sigh. I hate penalties. At least they got the 0.25.
Of Hearts, I said, "I think everyone would expect two wins and 0.5 points." How about no wins and 0.125 points? Versus a team from Malta? Very embarassing.
Finally, Aberdeen had looked rusty. "If Aberdeen can shake off some rust, they are certainly capable of a good result, but the full 0.5 points, or even advancement is not assured." Well, they got the full 0.5 points, and they're Scotland's sole Europa League representative (at least until Celtic gets knocked down from the Champions League).
"I think a good outcome of the second round would be to see Scotland with 1.875 points or more for the year, with three out of four teams advancing. If two (or fewer) teams advance and Scotland only comes out of this with 1.5 points or fewer, things will not be looking up." So it's a split decision -- 1.875 points, but only two teams advancing.
Third-Round Preview
So Celtic is off to Kazakhstan to face Astana. Honestly, while they should win, it's going to be dicey. I included Kazakhstan in the chart above to show their position in the provisional 2017 rankings. A little below Scotland. If you stretch things out to the (very provisional) 2018 rankings, they're actually poised to pass Scotland. As for Astana, they were in the Champions League group stages last weekend, so a Celtic loss and dropping into the Europa League playoffs is a distinct possibility.Aberdeen faces Maribor of Slovenia. Slovenia is a couple of notches below Kazakhastan. However, two years ago Maribor knocked out Celtic on their way to the Champions League group stages. It's not going to be easy for Aberdeen, but they've got an experienced squad.
A good outcome would have both teams alive, with Celtic still in the Champions League. Honestly, if that happens, the minimum points (2.375) would be acceptable. If it doesn't, you'd like to see Aberdeen add to the coefficient on its way out, with Celtic's main contribution likely to be in the group stages of whichever competition they are in at that point.
Where We Stand
First of all, my plan all along was that Celtic needs to stay Celtic (or Rangers, but we'll address that next year maybe) and pick up on the order of 12 points (3 after adjustment for the coefficient). They're at 1, which is not great, but most importantly they are alive.The other teams need to provide 8 or 9 parts. Aberdeen has 3, so they've done their share and are poised to pick up more. Hearts got 2.5 before exiting, which is close to their share. Hibs, however, exited with 1, which is typical for Scotland, and frankly more than you'd expect for a lower-division team. So 6.5 so far. If Aberdeen can advance, there's every reason the non-Celtic teams can hold up their end of the bargain for the year.
Looking at the chart at the top of this post, Norway is in sad shape and is certainly catchable this year. Denmark is doing great, and will likely pass their Scandinavian neighbors soon. Scotland has come close to catching Poland, but the four countries directly below Scotland have done at least as well and are keeping the pressure on. (He says, pretending that anyone feels pressure related to the UEFA coefficient.)
Tuesday, July 12, 2016
Bowie Restaurant Project: (BB8) Killarney House
Killarney House
584 W Central Ave, Davidsonville
Most Recent Foursquare Check-in: 6/29/2016
Total Foursquare Check-ins: 2
Pre-Foursquare Visits: No
Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars
In addition to reviewing (most of) the restaurants in Bowie, I sometimes highlight a restaurant in the area that provides something Bowie is lacking. I did the seventh and most recent "Beyond Bowie" installment in 2014, so this makes this one...BB-8.
(Sorry.)
Anyway, Killarney House is great. The food is delicious, but it's the setting that makes it a must-visit. It's an Irish pub out in the countryside -- how great is that? Normally I think of the Beyond Bowie series as "restaurants that Bowie doesn't have, but should." But I'm not sure where you'd put this in Bowie to get the same effect.
One of my motivations for reviewing restaurants was finding new places to take people who were visiting work (RIP, Grace's Fortune). This is a great place to take people to convince them not every restaurant in the area is in a strip mall.
584 W Central Ave, Davidsonville
Most Recent Foursquare Check-in: 6/29/2016
Total Foursquare Check-ins: 2
Pre-Foursquare Visits: No
Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars
In addition to reviewing (most of) the restaurants in Bowie, I sometimes highlight a restaurant in the area that provides something Bowie is lacking. I did the seventh and most recent "Beyond Bowie" installment in 2014, so this makes this one...BB-8.
(Sorry.)
Anyway, Killarney House is great. The food is delicious, but it's the setting that makes it a must-visit. It's an Irish pub out in the countryside -- how great is that? Normally I think of the Beyond Bowie series as "restaurants that Bowie doesn't have, but should." But I'm not sure where you'd put this in Bowie to get the same effect.
One of my motivations for reviewing restaurants was finding new places to take people who were visiting work (RIP, Grace's Fortune). This is a great place to take people to convince them not every restaurant in the area is in a strip mall.
Bowie Restaurant News
- The Olive Grove is closed.
- Sardi's Pollo a la Brasa will be giving Bowie its second Peruvian chicken restaurant, at Bowie Town Center.
- Pho D'Lite is coming to Hilltop Plaza.
Sunday, July 10, 2016
Scotland's UEFA Coefficient: Second-Round Preview
First Round Review
Before we preview the second round, let's recap what happened in the first round. Hearts squeaked by Estonian side Infonet FC 2-1 at home before taking a definitive 4-2 away win. End result: 0.5 points for the coefficient, and a second-round date with the Maltese team Birkirkara FC.Aberdeen got two late goals for a 3-1 home win against part-time Luxembourgers Fola Esch, before falling to an embarrassing 1-0 loss that left them one goal away from a first-round exit. End result: 0.25 points for the coefficient, and a second-round matchup with Latvian side Ventspils. Note that if Aberdeen had won this match, that would have been an extra 0.25 carried through for the coefficient for an entire 5-year period.
Looking at the above chart excerpt from Bert Kassies' excellent site, not much has changed among teams within two points of Scotland. Of most note is the bad round Poland had, seeing one team knocked out, only picking up 0.25 points and falling behind Denmark. I included Norway in the picture just to note that they had trouble too, having a team knocked out to the fourth-placed Welsh side.
So where are we (as fans of Scotland -- specifically Scotland's UEFA coefficient) and where are we headed? I have two different ways of looking at things.
Reasons for Pessimism
Among the teams within two points of Scotland, only Poland did worse -- Denmark, Azerbaijan, Cyprus and Israel all did better. If Scotland is not only going to retain their ranking, but improve, they need to gain ground, not lose it.Going into the second round, Hearts has to face a Maltese side that took West Ham United to penalties last year. Aberdeen looked shaky in both of their matches -- Ventspils didn't. And Hibs, a second-tier club, has to face Brøndby, who just advanced with a 10-1 aggregate score. (Note that losses to Brøndby both hurt Scotland and help Denmark.) Celtic should be fine against a team from Gibraltar, but it's later rounds where we worry about their performance slipping.
Reasons for Optimism
Despite not quite keeping pace with most of the countries ranked in the twenties, Scotland didn't slip more than a quarter-point compared to any of them. And it did keep all teams alive to earn more points.
Further, my past analysis indicates that a typical year gives Scotland a coefficient contribution of 3.75 -- 3 from Celtic and 0.75 from everybody else. Well, they've already got 0.75 from everybody else, so things are looking better than usual, with all three non-Celtics able to add to that. Bringing Scotland's coefficient gradually up into the mid-teens requires the non-Celtics to contribute consistent totals of 2-2.25 points/year -- that's at least mathematically possible in the second round alone.
And despite the possibility of upsets, three of the opponents are from leagues ranked 40, 50 and 52 out of 54 European countries. And although Hibs have a tough road ahead, their new manager did take Celtic to the knockout stages of the Champions League a few years back, so they may do better in Europe than they have any right to.
Second Round Preview
Celtic starts things off with Champions League matches against Lincoln Red Imps, who won the Gibraltar Premier League for the 14th time. Celtic has no business being in Europe if they can't dispatch these guys handily. They should pull out the full 0.5 points for the coefficient, but it's certainly possible that they get way ahead in the first leg and settle for a draw or a narrow loss in the second to rest their players.
Hibs face Brøndby (honestly, I will never tire of putting ø in my posts). I don't hold out much hope here, but it would be nice to see Hibs grab 0.125 or even 0.25, even if they don't advance.
Hearts face Birkirkara. The Maltese have never made it out of the second round of European competition, and I don't see this year being any different. Like Celtic, Hearts might drop some points by not going all out in the second leg, but after their impressive performance in the second leg of the first round, I think everyone would expect two wins and 0.5 points.
Aberdeen takes on Ventspils. If Aberdeen can shake off some rust, they are certainly capable of a good result, but the full 0.5 points, or even advancement is not assured.
I think a good outcome of the second round would be to see Scotland with 1.875 points or more for the year, with three out of four teams advancing. If two (or fewer) teams advance and Scotland only comes out of this with 1.5 points or fewer, things will not be looking up.
Friday, July 01, 2016
Geocaching Update: So Many Minutes
One way I've been finding caches to fill in holes is by creating a map that shows where I've already found caches. The vertical stripes are pretty clear; the shaded in areas show minutes I've already covered. (It extends west to 77 degrees.) The top and bottom of the rectangles represent the extent to which I've filled in the 38 North and 39 North latitude challenges in this area. I could create more boxes to show areas I've cleared in Baltimore, but that would be too much work.
Anyway, the bottom line is that anywhere in the shaded boxes will not help me with a longitude or latitude challenge. There are only five strips to fill in between Washington and Annapolis, so it will be challenging to get beyond 33.
The five minutes I've filled in are 28, 29, 30, 32, 39. The kids were in camp in Severna Park this week, which allowed quick stops for 28 and 30 (and a failure for 34). Minute 29 was found in April on a visit to a friend in Essex, Minute 32 was in a shopping center while waiting for the Annapolis MVA to open, and Minute 39 was in the woods near Crofton while passing through.
Tuesday, June 28, 2016
Scotland's UEFA Coefficient: First-Round Preview
I've developed a bit of an obsession with where Scotland's UEFA coefficient is headed, so I might as well go all-in and offer a preview of what is at stake in this week's Europa League kickoff.
The places in the 2016-7 Europa League are actually determined by the coefficient at the end of the 2014-5 season, which is in turn made up of performance over the 2010-2015 time frame. For that, Scotland ranked 23rd. From the 2015-6 coefficient, they dip to 25th for next year's placings. That was actually caused by good performances by Sweden and Norway, rather than significantly worse play by Scottish clubs.
The good news for Scotland is that as 2010-1 performances get wiped off the ledger, they are tentatively back in 23rd place (before 2016-7 results get added in). Again, that's not because Scottish performance in 2010-1 was bad (though it was), but because Cyprus and Israel had really good years that year, which no longer count.
Scotland starts this campaign with 14.55 points. For countries with four clubs in European play (true of everyone ranked 16 through 32), a win in a qualifying round is worth 0.25 points towards their coefficient, and a draw is worth 0.125. Scotland has two clubs in first-round play (Hearts and Aberdeen), for a maximum of 1 point from this round. (Each team plays two games.) Let's look at who they can catch or be caught by. (Data collected from here.)
Azerbaijan was 29th in 2015-6, so they actually have three teams who have to enter in the first round. (One played an early game, hence why they have already picked up 0.125 points.) Thus they could pick up as many as 1.375 points, and pass Scotland as early as next week. By contrast, should Denmark's two teams lose all their games, Scotland's teams could pass them with a clean sweep. Reality will probably be somewhere in between.
At least as important as how many points each of these teams picks up is which of them advance to the second round, where each team can again earn up to half a point. (The same is true of the third round and the playoffs.)
I'll be back around July 8th to review what has happened and to preview the second round. (In the second round, Champions League matches will also start to be relevant.)
The places in the 2016-7 Europa League are actually determined by the coefficient at the end of the 2014-5 season, which is in turn made up of performance over the 2010-2015 time frame. For that, Scotland ranked 23rd. From the 2015-6 coefficient, they dip to 25th for next year's placings. That was actually caused by good performances by Sweden and Norway, rather than significantly worse play by Scottish clubs.
The good news for Scotland is that as 2010-1 performances get wiped off the ledger, they are tentatively back in 23rd place (before 2016-7 results get added in). Again, that's not because Scottish performance in 2010-1 was bad (though it was), but because Cyprus and Israel had really good years that year, which no longer count.
Scotland starts this campaign with 14.55 points. For countries with four clubs in European play (true of everyone ranked 16 through 32), a win in a qualifying round is worth 0.25 points towards their coefficient, and a draw is worth 0.125. Scotland has two clubs in first-round play (Hearts and Aberdeen), for a maximum of 1 point from this round. (Each team plays two games.) Let's look at who they can catch or be caught by. (Data collected from here.)
At least as important as how many points each of these teams picks up is which of them advance to the second round, where each team can again earn up to half a point. (The same is true of the third round and the playoffs.)
I'll be back around July 8th to review what has happened and to preview the second round. (In the second round, Champions League matches will also start to be relevant.)
Monday, June 20, 2016
Geocaching: FTF & LPC
I got my first geocaching "first to find" (FTF) in late 2007. FTFs are an unofficial geocaching statistic awarded to the first person to find a particular geocache. I inadvertently picked up one in Australia almost a year later on an Earthcache. I hadn't noticed ahead of time that the cache hadn't been found yet.
Well, since I've started to geocache again in earnest this year, I haven't had any new FTFs...until this weekend. I had a couple of near misses. In one, I got a new cache alert when I was at the allergist, and decided I would drop off a library book, then find it on the way to work...only to pull up to see the FTFer replacing the cache. Another one, I was at a nearby grocery store when I got the alert, but I searched to no avail.
That one was a type of cache not prominent during my last caching binge (2007-8): an LPC. LPC stands for "Lamp Post Cache." Most lamp posts in parking lots across the country have a "skirt" above the cement base. You probably won't have noticed if you don't geocache, but that metal skirt can be lifted, and a small object can be hidden underneath. (Click here to see an example.)
I don't want to offend anybody who hides caches there, but LPCs are about the least exciting type of caches there are. You're in a parking lot, messing with a lamp post, and hoping nobody asks you why. They're often placed apologetically with a note that it's a good cache if you're trying to keep a streak of consecutive days going.
The one I missed FTF on after leaving the grocery store was like that, but it was placed in a magnet attached to the inside of the skirt. I came back later (after being assure it was there) and found it.
Well, when I got an alert on another one this Saturday, I wasn't sure if it was an LPC. But the kids were happily enjoying a playdate, and it seemed like a good shot at an FTF. I drove up to an office park, and, well, from the Google Maps image, you can see that the cache location is pretty much right on top of a lamp post. There's no other place it can be. Still, it took me five or ten minutes of searching. This one was in a hide-a-key inside the skirt, and because it was black, I missed it the first several times I looked. A day later, nobody else has found it (or presumably, even looked for it).
I think 11 of the 52 caches I've found this year have been LPCs. They are mainly good to satisfy some statistical metric, but I'd certainly prefer a nice container in the woods, or a virtual cache.
Well, since I've started to geocache again in earnest this year, I haven't had any new FTFs...until this weekend. I had a couple of near misses. In one, I got a new cache alert when I was at the allergist, and decided I would drop off a library book, then find it on the way to work...only to pull up to see the FTFer replacing the cache. Another one, I was at a nearby grocery store when I got the alert, but I searched to no avail.
That one was a type of cache not prominent during my last caching binge (2007-8): an LPC. LPC stands for "Lamp Post Cache." Most lamp posts in parking lots across the country have a "skirt" above the cement base. You probably won't have noticed if you don't geocache, but that metal skirt can be lifted, and a small object can be hidden underneath. (Click here to see an example.)
I don't want to offend anybody who hides caches there, but LPCs are about the least exciting type of caches there are. You're in a parking lot, messing with a lamp post, and hoping nobody asks you why. They're often placed apologetically with a note that it's a good cache if you're trying to keep a streak of consecutive days going.
 |
| Google Maps view of the cache |
Well, when I got an alert on another one this Saturday, I wasn't sure if it was an LPC. But the kids were happily enjoying a playdate, and it seemed like a good shot at an FTF. I drove up to an office park, and, well, from the Google Maps image, you can see that the cache location is pretty much right on top of a lamp post. There's no other place it can be. Still, it took me five or ten minutes of searching. This one was in a hide-a-key inside the skirt, and because it was black, I missed it the first several times I looked. A day later, nobody else has found it (or presumably, even looked for it).
Thursday, June 02, 2016
Scottish Football: Thinking About Club Coefficients
As we wait for the June 30th kickoff of Europa League football (or the June 20th draw date), I thought of a new factor that I had overlooked in trying to figure out how Scottish clubs can be successful there.
I've focused on the Scottish UEFA coefficient, which determines where the clubs enter the Europa League (or in Celtic's case, the Champions League). But the individual clubs also have UEFA coefficients. Part of that is determined by the national coefficient, but part is determined by the club's performance in Europe over the past 5 years.
I didn't understand how that mattered until I saw an article about potential first-round and second-round opponents. Basically, at each round, the teams with the better coefficients are "seeded," and the worse ones are "unseeded," with each seeded team facing an unseeded one. So it's important to have a good club coefficient to make sure you have an easier opponent.
Anyway, this re-enforces two principles I had already notice about the way the ranking works.
1. The Rich Get Richer. If you do well, you have a good coefficient, so you have an easier opponent, so you do well, so you have a good coefficient... This would seem fatalistic -- the rules are rigged against you, but there is a sub-principle which gives some hope.
1a. A Little Luck Goes a Long Way. If a team beats the odds...say they're unseeded, but draw one of the weaker seeded teams and pull off a minor upset, well, then, they're in better shape for the next five years. Maybe that's enough to get them seeded in the first-round, they have a little more luck, get seeded in the second round...
2. It Is Better to Have a League Where the Same Teams Dominate. Before, I figured that was true because the richer teams likely have the resources to compete in Europe, as well as the experience from being there most years. But an underdog not only has to deal with a lower budget and less experience, they are also more likely to be unseeded.
So how does that affect the current crop of Scottish teams?
How important is consistency? It looks like 3.460 is what a Scottish club with no European experience would get just from the country coefficient. So one year's experience is generally enough to get at least a seeded draw in the first round. On the other hand, if the second-best club in Scotland had been the same every year for the past five years, that club would have a 9.460 coefficient. That's probably not quite enough to be seeded in the third round, but it's close.
I've focused on the Scottish UEFA coefficient, which determines where the clubs enter the Europa League (or in Celtic's case, the Champions League). But the individual clubs also have UEFA coefficients. Part of that is determined by the national coefficient, but part is determined by the club's performance in Europe over the past 5 years.
I didn't understand how that mattered until I saw an article about potential first-round and second-round opponents. Basically, at each round, the teams with the better coefficients are "seeded," and the worse ones are "unseeded," with each seeded team facing an unseeded one. So it's important to have a good club coefficient to make sure you have an easier opponent.
Anyway, this re-enforces two principles I had already notice about the way the ranking works.
1. The Rich Get Richer. If you do well, you have a good coefficient, so you have an easier opponent, so you do well, so you have a good coefficient... This would seem fatalistic -- the rules are rigged against you, but there is a sub-principle which gives some hope.
1a. A Little Luck Goes a Long Way. If a team beats the odds...say they're unseeded, but draw one of the weaker seeded teams and pull off a minor upset, well, then, they're in better shape for the next five years. Maybe that's enough to get them seeded in the first-round, they have a little more luck, get seeded in the second round...
2. It Is Better to Have a League Where the Same Teams Dominate. Before, I figured that was true because the richer teams likely have the resources to compete in Europe, as well as the experience from being there most years. But an underdog not only has to deal with a lower budget and less experience, they are also more likely to be unseeded.
So how does that affect the current crop of Scottish teams?
- Celtic 40.460
- Motherwell 6.460
- Hearts 6.460
- Saint Johnstone 6.210
- Aberdeen 5.460
- Dundee United 4.960
- Rangers 4.960
- ICT 3.960
- Hibs 3.960
How important is consistency? It looks like 3.460 is what a Scottish club with no European experience would get just from the country coefficient. So one year's experience is generally enough to get at least a seeded draw in the first round. On the other hand, if the second-best club in Scotland had been the same every year for the past five years, that club would have a 9.460 coefficient. That's probably not quite enough to be seeded in the third round, but it's close.
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
Scottish Football: European Weirdness
In March, I speculated about which Scottish soccer clubs would qualify for European competition. As expected, Celtic, Aberdeen and Hearts took the top three places, and as expected, Celtic took the sole Scottish Champions League berth. This is all good. With their new manager, Celtic has a chance to make a run, and the other two sides have enough resources to win a few rounds if luck falls their way.
It's the other place that is kind of weird. The top three clubs are guaranteed European places, along with the Scottish Cup winner. If, as often happens, the Scottish Cup winner is in the top three, the fourth place team goes too. Well, this year, the Scottish Cup final was contested between the two biggest clubs not already in the top three...Rangers and Hibernian, both of whom played this year in the second-tier Scottish Championship.
Now that would not have necessarily messed up the European places. With both teams contending for promotion, a big-time newly-promoted club would have the resources to compete in Europe. Rangers won the Championship comfortably, and I'm sure they would have loved to give their supporters European football to go with their first first-tier competition in four years.
But...things didn't work out that way. After losing the Premiership playoff, Hibs managed to lift the Scottish Cup for the first time in 114 years. A great story, certainly, but not the best thing for the UEFA coefficient. Hibs will be spending their third year in the Championship. They absolutely have to get out, and so they will be focusing on that rather than a European competition that doesn't give them much hope. Despite their large fan base, their resources will be constrained by being a second-tier club, so I can't imagine they'll be able to compete seriously.
Still, with three out of four high-resource teams, there's hope that Scotland will have enough success to halt the slide in their UEFA coefficient.
It's the other place that is kind of weird. The top three clubs are guaranteed European places, along with the Scottish Cup winner. If, as often happens, the Scottish Cup winner is in the top three, the fourth place team goes too. Well, this year, the Scottish Cup final was contested between the two biggest clubs not already in the top three...Rangers and Hibernian, both of whom played this year in the second-tier Scottish Championship.
Now that would not have necessarily messed up the European places. With both teams contending for promotion, a big-time newly-promoted club would have the resources to compete in Europe. Rangers won the Championship comfortably, and I'm sure they would have loved to give their supporters European football to go with their first first-tier competition in four years.
But...things didn't work out that way. After losing the Premiership playoff, Hibs managed to lift the Scottish Cup for the first time in 114 years. A great story, certainly, but not the best thing for the UEFA coefficient. Hibs will be spending their third year in the Championship. They absolutely have to get out, and so they will be focusing on that rather than a European competition that doesn't give them much hope. Despite their large fan base, their resources will be constrained by being a second-tier club, so I can't imagine they'll be able to compete seriously.
Still, with three out of four high-resource teams, there's hope that Scotland will have enough success to halt the slide in their UEFA coefficient.
Housekeeping Note
The Android's Dungeon is back on-line. It was not appearing everywhere. Basically, 15+ years ago, I contracted with a small ISP for hosting. They were bought out by a company that merged with another company, was bought out again, then was bought out by one of the top five network providers. So they don't have a lot of interest in giving support to someone paying them $5/month. I finally figured out that the domain name servers from the original tiny ISP needed to be updated to the name servers for the giant ISP, and that did the trick.Sunday, May 15, 2016
Nebula Update: Uprooted
While I haven't made any progress on my project of reading all the Nebula-winning novels, at least I haven't fallen further behind. That's because Uprooted, which won this year's award, is a book I've already read. My Goodreads review from last summer is below.
Uprooted by Naomi Novik
My rating: 4 of 5 stars
The fantasy is based on Polish folklore. I found the perspective refreshing, and I was impressed at Novik's ability to shift from the Temeraire series to a very different type of story. The plot was good, and the characters were well-formed.
I had two quibbles, one more serious than the other. I found sections of the book creepy, and I'm not big on creepy. More seriously, the parts of the book that described how magic was done did not click with me -- there was a lot of trying to convey how it felt to do magic, and I would have like to have skipped those parts. Unfortunately, those parts ended up figuring prominently in the climax of the novel, which took the shine off what was otherwise a really enjoyable read.
Uprooted by Naomi NovikMy rating: 4 of 5 stars
The fantasy is based on Polish folklore. I found the perspective refreshing, and I was impressed at Novik's ability to shift from the Temeraire series to a very different type of story. The plot was good, and the characters were well-formed.
I had two quibbles, one more serious than the other. I found sections of the book creepy, and I'm not big on creepy. More seriously, the parts of the book that described how magic was done did not click with me -- there was a lot of trying to convey how it felt to do magic, and I would have like to have skipped those parts. Unfortunately, those parts ended up figuring prominently in the climax of the novel, which took the shine off what was otherwise a really enjoyable read.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
Geocaching: Busy Month
I posted recently comparisons of the various geocaching statistics web sites. Each had advantages and disadvantages. I think, though, that I'm growing to like Project Geocaching. One of the drawbacks is that it only updates once a week, unless you pay them. But that's given me a handy marker for when I check in on my stats, rather than updating them multiple times in a week.
So let's check out what's new...
Although I haven't topped my best week from 2008, I am having my busiest month yet. Some of that was my recent trip to California, but I've also been trying to find a few minutes here or there most days to grab a nearby cache.
Deep thought alert: one of the things that attracted me to geocaching is the idea that these hidden pockets exist even in our built-up world where people hide little boxes of stuff. Another thing I find interesting is finding little pockets of time in the day to locate these little boxes. As an example, recently I was driving down a highway and needed to pull over to make a couple of phone calls. I remembered where there was a geocache, so I parked 100 feet away, and in between phone calls, I signed the log.
Anyway, what else is new in the stats?
I picked up four more of the 81 possible difficulty/terrain combinations. Given that I've only found one with difficulty or terrain greater than 3, and there are only 25 combos that don't fall into that category, I'm running out of the easier ones to knock out.
So let's check out what's new...
Deep thought alert: one of the things that attracted me to geocaching is the idea that these hidden pockets exist even in our built-up world where people hide little boxes of stuff. Another thing I find interesting is finding little pockets of time in the day to locate these little boxes. As an example, recently I was driving down a highway and needed to pull over to make a couple of phone calls. I remembered where there was a geocache, so I parked 100 feet away, and in between phone calls, I signed the log.
Anyway, what else is new in the stats?
I picked up four more of the 81 possible difficulty/terrain combinations. Given that I've only found one with difficulty or terrain greater than 3, and there are only 25 combos that don't fall into that category, I'm running out of the easier ones to knock out.
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Geocaching: California Cachin'
I had a business trip to California last week, and it seemed like a good opportunity to get in some geocaching. I thought it would be fun to see some of my statistics change, so I did some thing that would update the numbers. In particular, my previous longest streak of days caching was three (set on an August 2008 trip to another part of California), so I tried to find a cache every day.
On my walk back to the hotel from work, I detoured to find a cache called The Musical "Rocks", which led me to one of those only-in-Southern-California things, a Muzak speaker in the middle of a garden. I grabbed the cache and took it to a less conspicuous place. I looked inside -- and it was empty! (Except for a spider!) No log to sign means I hadn't really "found" the cache, so I went back and, sure enough, the log was sitting on the ground. I was afraid I had dropped it, but the condition it was in meant that it had clearly been sitting out for some time. I signed it and replaced it, and I got my week off to a good start. Nothing too exciting statistically, except that my overall find count increased by one, as did several sub-counts (United States, California, San Diego County, etc.) I guess it was my 100th cache in the United States.
The next day, after dropping a friend off after lunch, I realized I was near one of the caches I had planned to find. I parked, walked through a park, went to the coordinates and found...a smashed-up cache, just sitting out on the ground. I signed the log, replaced it as well as I could, and logged a note that it needed maintenance. (None has yet been performed.) Why was this cache on my list? Well, it's the Kidz Cache: Nobel Athletic Area. I had never found a cache beginning with the letter "K". Finding a cache beginning with each letter of the alphabet -- and each number -- is a silly challenge, but one of the stats sites I use keeps track, so I figured I might as well try to fill it out. Now I'm only missing X and Z. And 0, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. Really, who gives caches names that start with numbers?
To make sure my trip to California didn't consist entirely of damaged caches, on Wednesday evening I went to see one of my favorite kind of caches, a virtual cache. No new virtual caches have been accepted for over a decade, so it's kind of fun to track down the remaining ones. This one led me to a sculpture of Mark Twain sitting on a bench in a shopping center. The geocache asked people not to post a clear picture, so as not to ruin the "surprise", so I saved my clear picture for the blog.
Another relatively rare cache type is the "Whereigo" cache. Here's my interpretation of what happened with them. Geocaching is, by design, a technology game. The technology required (specifically, general availability of accurate GPS signals) dates back to the birth of geocaching in 2000. The fundamental aspects of geocaching (find a container using latitude and longitude, sign a log) haven't really changed since then. In an attempt to modernize things, Groundspeak, the parent company of geocaching, came up with a type of geocache that would require you to solve a puzzle on your phone. Unfortunately, they did this in 2008, so the phone of choice was the Pocket PC.
For whatever reason, Groundspeak never pushed Whereigo on more modern smartphones, but there is an unofficial app for Android, and there was a cache within walking distance of my hotel, so I gave it a go. The "puzzle" was very basic...start here, walk here, show me a picture and answer a really easy question (which my phone did not enforce answering), then walk to another spot with the geocache. (Though I did appreciate the picture of the geocache, so I knew what I was looking for.) It was just a demonstration of the Whereigo system, so I appreciated that it wasn't too complicated. And it did what I appreciate from geocaching -- took me to a quiet, natural spot hidden right near the busy world around it. And it was my seventh type of cache, the first new one in almost eight years.
As far as I can tell, I'm unusual in the geocaching hobby for mostly finding one cache per day, but on Thursday I decided to break that habit, and on the way back to my hotel I found a second one. It was on a nice, quiet path near the busy UTC mall that I never would have come across without geocaching. Another success! (Sadly, I did not snap a picture quickly enough to show the hummingbird I saw.)
So at four days, I had a new record streak, and I decided to push it to five. I found a virtual cache near Poway. It was a nice railroad-themed park, what can I say?
So what did the week do to my totals? My caches found went up to 121.
Yay.
I did, in fact, achieve my longest "GeoStreak."
I have now found 105 caches in the U.S., 23 caches in California and 15 in San Diego County.
My "total cache-to-cache distance" is up to 103,469 miles, which is pretty good for only having found 121 caches. (It used to be over 1,000 miles/cache, but finds 92 through 115 were in Maryland, which brought things down.)
So nothing too terribly exciting, but it got me some extra exercise on my trip.
 |
| Chewed-up log |
On my walk back to the hotel from work, I detoured to find a cache called The Musical "Rocks", which led me to one of those only-in-Southern-California things, a Muzak speaker in the middle of a garden. I grabbed the cache and took it to a less conspicuous place. I looked inside -- and it was empty! (Except for a spider!) No log to sign means I hadn't really "found" the cache, so I went back and, sure enough, the log was sitting on the ground. I was afraid I had dropped it, but the condition it was in meant that it had clearly been sitting out for some time. I signed it and replaced it, and I got my week off to a good start. Nothing too exciting statistically, except that my overall find count increased by one, as did several sub-counts (United States, California, San Diego County, etc.) I guess it was my 100th cache in the United States.
 |
| Smashed cache, as I found it. |
 |
| These are some letters. |
 |
| Sam & Me |
Another relatively rare cache type is the "Whereigo" cache. Here's my interpretation of what happened with them. Geocaching is, by design, a technology game. The technology required (specifically, general availability of accurate GPS signals) dates back to the birth of geocaching in 2000. The fundamental aspects of geocaching (find a container using latitude and longitude, sign a log) haven't really changed since then. In an attempt to modernize things, Groundspeak, the parent company of geocaching, came up with a type of geocache that would require you to solve a puzzle on your phone. Unfortunately, they did this in 2008, so the phone of choice was the Pocket PC.
 |
| Here I went. |
 |
| Seven types of caches! |
 |
| Path near UTC |
So at four days, I had a new record streak, and I decided to push it to five. I found a virtual cache near Poway. It was a nice railroad-themed park, what can I say?
 | |||
| Poway. |
Yay.
I did, in fact, achieve my longest "GeoStreak."
My "total cache-to-cache distance" is up to 103,469 miles, which is pretty good for only having found 121 caches. (It used to be over 1,000 miles/cache, but finds 92 through 115 were in Maryland, which brought things down.)
So nothing too terribly exciting, but it got me some extra exercise on my trip.
Tuesday, March 29, 2016
Geocaching: 23 Minutes
I have been looking for a straightforward way of keeping track in which minutes I've found geocaches for the West 76 Degrees Longitude Challenge. When I started keeping track a couple of years ago, I had hit 11 of the 60 minutes, and I made a list in that blog post. As I found more minutes, I had been updating blog posts, but that was not very organized, and didn't keep track when I didn't feel like blogging about every single find.
There is a checker for this challenge, but as I noticed last year, it got confused by the event cache I attended, which doesn't count for this challenge. I actually wrote to the maintainer of that checker about the glitch, but I never heard back.
I had been keeping track of things in a text file, but that was inelegant, as well. It finally hit me that a bookmark list on geocaching.com was the way to go. So I made one.
Here is an excerpt that includes Minutes 47 and 49, which I found this past weekend.
From 40 on up, I'm only missing 48, 51 and 53. I've identified candidates for those in the Greenbelt/Laurel areas. (Weirdly, there are no caches near Bowie in Minute 48.)
Anyway, that gives me 23 minutes total. The three to the west shouldn't be too hard, and I can get most of the thirties in Anne Arundel County. After that, I may stall on this challenge.
Oh, and that checker? It now seems to properly exclude the event cache. Since it list 37 minutes I lack, I have confirmed my list.
There is a checker for this challenge, but as I noticed last year, it got confused by the event cache I attended, which doesn't count for this challenge. I actually wrote to the maintainer of that checker about the glitch, but I never heard back.
I had been keeping track of things in a text file, but that was inelegant, as well. It finally hit me that a bookmark list on geocaching.com was the way to go. So I made one.
Here is an excerpt that includes Minutes 47 and 49, which I found this past weekend.
Anyway, that gives me 23 minutes total. The three to the west shouldn't be too hard, and I can get most of the thirties in Anne Arundel County. After that, I may stall on this challenge.
Oh, and that checker? It now seems to properly exclude the event cache. Since it list 37 minutes I lack, I have confirmed my list.
Sunday, March 20, 2016
Can Scottish clubs mount a European comeback starting this summer?
The world of European club football (soccer) is weird to an American, and I continue to find Scotland an interesting lens through which to view it.
Last year I explored various scenarios where Scottish teams performed better, and their country ranking (currently mired in the 20s) improved enough to give better placement in the Champions League and Europa League. I got pretty deep into the weeds, but the main thing that needs to happen is that Celtic needs to have run of decent performances (unlike this year), and the other clubs need not to get knocked out of the Europa League quite so early.
On the other clubs' ability to do that, I think the key is restoring a vexing quality of the Scottish game -- inequality. The Scottish game is famously unequal -- the last time a team other than Celtic or Rangers won the top league was 1985. That's one of the quirks that first intrigued me.
But while inequality may seem like less fun for fans of the league, I think it may be the key to European success. You see, the last few years have seen one low-budget Scottish team after another luck into a European place and then flame out to a more experienced side from another small country.
There are five clubs in Scotland that are bigger than all the others -- Celtic, Rangers, Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen. They are the biggest sides in the biggest cities. If they can get good, they will have the funding to both compete in Europe and to return good teams consistently, so they develop some European experience.
Unfortunately, consistency has only really been Celtic's friend lately. Three of the clubs were in the second-tier Championship last year, and two still are (although maybe not for long). That said, this year looks promising, and I'd like to explore the fun possibilities, before they get overtaken by a particular reality.
The good news is that three of the European places go to the top three teams in the top league, and those three slots are solidly occupied by three big clubs (Celtic, Aberdeen and Hearts). It might be problematic if Aberdeen steals the title away from Celtic, but that seems less likely after today. (I've given this far too much thought, but although a second-place Celtic might help Scotland's coefficient just as much with Europa League excellence, the financial hit they'd take would damage their chances of competing in future years.)
Celtic has been in Europe ever year since 1995, and in the Champions League fourteen out of the last fifteen years, so their pedigree is without peer. Aberdeen has made it to the third round of Europa League qualifying two years in a row, so they have as much European experience as any non-Celtic club. Hearts is four years removed from European competition, but the club that has emerged from the flames of their relegation seems to be one of the best-run ones in Scotland. I have high hopes for them, if not this year, then to be back in future years.
It's the fourth European place that seems most curious. The other place is given to the Scottish Cup winner. There are four teams left in Scottish Cup contention. If Celtic wins the whole thing, their place would be bumped down to the fourth-place team in the league, which is currently St. Johnstone. They are currently riding a streak of four Europa League appearances, but they got knocked out immediately in two of them, and only advanced one round in the other two. Their three wins, four losses and five draws did not add much to Scotland's coefficient. (The coefficient of 17.3 dip slightly below 16 if they had simply forfeited all games, still leaving Scotland #25 in Europe.) They've had their chance, but I guess if you had to throw a low-budget team in there, they might finally get something out of their experience.
Another possibility is that Dundee United could lift the Scottish Cup. That would be weird, as they seem almost certain to be relegated. Having a Championship side play in the Europa League would be...uh, interesting, but probably not successful.
Speaking of Championship sides, the other two teams left in are Rangers and Hibs, the two largest clubs who are down in the second-tier. Rangers will almost certainly be promoted, and there's a decent chance Hibs wins the promotion playoff, so I actually find these the most intriguing possibilities. Either could kick off their return to the top-flight by trying to make a run in the Europa League. It could motivate them to spend wisely on their team, if they have an additional way of making a splash.
We'll see. I'll report back later this year, when it may turn out to be some other team, if Celtic wins the Cup and St. Johnstone's stumbles.
Last year I explored various scenarios where Scottish teams performed better, and their country ranking (currently mired in the 20s) improved enough to give better placement in the Champions League and Europa League. I got pretty deep into the weeds, but the main thing that needs to happen is that Celtic needs to have run of decent performances (unlike this year), and the other clubs need not to get knocked out of the Europa League quite so early.
On the other clubs' ability to do that, I think the key is restoring a vexing quality of the Scottish game -- inequality. The Scottish game is famously unequal -- the last time a team other than Celtic or Rangers won the top league was 1985. That's one of the quirks that first intrigued me.
But while inequality may seem like less fun for fans of the league, I think it may be the key to European success. You see, the last few years have seen one low-budget Scottish team after another luck into a European place and then flame out to a more experienced side from another small country.
There are five clubs in Scotland that are bigger than all the others -- Celtic, Rangers, Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen. They are the biggest sides in the biggest cities. If they can get good, they will have the funding to both compete in Europe and to return good teams consistently, so they develop some European experience.
Unfortunately, consistency has only really been Celtic's friend lately. Three of the clubs were in the second-tier Championship last year, and two still are (although maybe not for long). That said, this year looks promising, and I'd like to explore the fun possibilities, before they get overtaken by a particular reality.
The good news is that three of the European places go to the top three teams in the top league, and those three slots are solidly occupied by three big clubs (Celtic, Aberdeen and Hearts). It might be problematic if Aberdeen steals the title away from Celtic, but that seems less likely after today. (I've given this far too much thought, but although a second-place Celtic might help Scotland's coefficient just as much with Europa League excellence, the financial hit they'd take would damage their chances of competing in future years.)
Celtic has been in Europe ever year since 1995, and in the Champions League fourteen out of the last fifteen years, so their pedigree is without peer. Aberdeen has made it to the third round of Europa League qualifying two years in a row, so they have as much European experience as any non-Celtic club. Hearts is four years removed from European competition, but the club that has emerged from the flames of their relegation seems to be one of the best-run ones in Scotland. I have high hopes for them, if not this year, then to be back in future years.
It's the fourth European place that seems most curious. The other place is given to the Scottish Cup winner. There are four teams left in Scottish Cup contention. If Celtic wins the whole thing, their place would be bumped down to the fourth-place team in the league, which is currently St. Johnstone. They are currently riding a streak of four Europa League appearances, but they got knocked out immediately in two of them, and only advanced one round in the other two. Their three wins, four losses and five draws did not add much to Scotland's coefficient. (The coefficient of 17.3 dip slightly below 16 if they had simply forfeited all games, still leaving Scotland #25 in Europe.) They've had their chance, but I guess if you had to throw a low-budget team in there, they might finally get something out of their experience.
Another possibility is that Dundee United could lift the Scottish Cup. That would be weird, as they seem almost certain to be relegated. Having a Championship side play in the Europa League would be...uh, interesting, but probably not successful.
Speaking of Championship sides, the other two teams left in are Rangers and Hibs, the two largest clubs who are down in the second-tier. Rangers will almost certainly be promoted, and there's a decent chance Hibs wins the promotion playoff, so I actually find these the most intriguing possibilities. Either could kick off their return to the top-flight by trying to make a run in the Europa League. It could motivate them to spend wisely on their team, if they have an additional way of making a splash.
We'll see. I'll report back later this year, when it may turn out to be some other team, if Celtic wins the Cup and St. Johnstone's stumbles.
Saturday, March 19, 2016
Farewell, Druidtree
I never met Max Neill, but I did beat him in a game of Go last year.
The 49-year-old Englishman passed away on Leap Day after a long battle with cancer.
His condition first came to my attention late last year when he made an unusual post on the Go server's message board, essentially asking about the etiquette for dying in the middle of a Go game. His concern was that he would lose a number of games when the clock ran out, and
In light of this sad news, the site administrator restored his rating to what his was before his death (18 kyu). People will thus know he's not a total beginner at this game.
Me? I'm not a total beginner, either, but I haven't improved much since I last posted about the game almost five years ago. I'm still 15 kyu. I had a 4-4 record in the server's 2015 Double-Digit Kyu Tournament. One of those victories was over Druidtree, aka Max Neill. According to the site, our entire written exchange over the 204 moves that comprised the game consisted of:
I won by 18.5 stones. Not a squeaker, but not an overwhelming game, either. About what you'd expect of someone 3 stones better in ranking. So he was good enough to give a game to someone like me who was plodding along for a decade. Definitely not a total beginner.
Thanks for the match, Max.
The 49-year-old Englishman passed away on Leap Day after a long battle with cancer.
His condition first came to my attention late last year when he made an unusual post on the Go server's message board, essentially asking about the etiquette for dying in the middle of a Go game. His concern was that he would lose a number of games when the clock ran out, and
"I'd like my rating after my death to reflect my actual rating, rather than drop like a stone due to unfinished matches. Not sure why this is important to me. I suppose it's so that people researching my legacy don't think I was a total beginner at the game."Earlier this month, some other site users noticed he had stopped making moves. I was able to do a little research to connect his user name (Druidtree) with his real name, and I found his obituary.
In light of this sad news, the site administrator restored his rating to what his was before his death (18 kyu). People will thus know he's not a total beginner at this game.
Me? I'm not a total beginner, either, but I haven't improved much since I last posted about the game almost five years ago. I'm still 15 kyu. I had a 4-4 record in the server's 2015 Double-Digit Kyu Tournament. One of those victories was over Druidtree, aka Max Neill. According to the site, our entire written exchange over the 204 moves that comprised the game consisted of:
1  | Enjoy. |
2  | Hi |
| 3 | Enjoy. |
| 204 | Thanks for the match. |
I won by 18.5 stones. Not a squeaker, but not an overwhelming game, either. About what you'd expect of someone 3 stones better in ranking. So he was good enough to give a game to someone like me who was plodding along for a decade. Definitely not a total beginner.
Thanks for the match, Max.
Thursday, March 17, 2016
Geocaching: Geocaching.com Statistics
I have recently mentioned generating geocaching statistics at My Geocaching Profile and Project-GC. The former requires you to generate a new stats file to upload -- which you can do at most every three days. The latter updates automatically, but only once a week. So what's to do if you have a new milestone to blog about, and you can't get either of these updated?
Well, I recently discovered that Geocaching.com has its own stats section of the profile for premium members. It's updated automatically when you find new caches. So, I recently found a cache with a difficulty rating of 1.0 and a terrain rating of 2.5. Here it is on my chart:
Actually, the best of the three for difficulty/terrain charts is Project-GC:
I particularly like the "Way to 81" part, which not only identifies the first cache found with a particular combo, but also tells you how many days you've gone between adding a new combination. But! I won't have combo #18 listed until this weekend. That's because I haven't felt like paying them the $23/year for Project-GC membership. Given my caching rate, I don't think that'd be money well-spent. What is my caching rate, Geocaching.com?
OK. 0.0324 caches/day. Weekly checking deemed not necessary.
The Geocaching.com stats page is fairly basic -- no county-by-county breakdowns, for example. I think that's not surprising -- the main purpose of the site is geocaching itself, not the side games enabled by statistics. I am a little bit surprised, however, that some of the formatting seems off.
Here, for example, the words on the left don't quite align with the bars in the middle. I understand the HTML gremlins that cause this, but I'd think Geocaching.com could make it look a little more professional. Still. It's my best option for up-to-date stats. Most of the time, however, I'm happy to wait for prettier ones.
Well, I recently discovered that Geocaching.com has its own stats section of the profile for premium members. It's updated automatically when you find new caches. So, I recently found a cache with a difficulty rating of 1.0 and a terrain rating of 2.5. Here it is on my chart:
I particularly like the "Way to 81" part, which not only identifies the first cache found with a particular combo, but also tells you how many days you've gone between adding a new combination. But! I won't have combo #18 listed until this weekend. That's because I haven't felt like paying them the $23/year for Project-GC membership. Given my caching rate, I don't think that'd be money well-spent. What is my caching rate, Geocaching.com?
The Geocaching.com stats page is fairly basic -- no county-by-county breakdowns, for example. I think that's not surprising -- the main purpose of the site is geocaching itself, not the side games enabled by statistics. I am a little bit surprised, however, that some of the formatting seems off.
Monday, March 07, 2016
Geocaching: Project-GC
I have mentioned that I like looking at my stats on "My Geocaching Profile."
I've also found another site that generates stats: Project-GC. Each site has its pluses and minuses. One advantage of Project-GC is that it allows you to download and display your "right now" stats, rather than embedding your evolving stats. So as of when I'm typing this, I have 101 finds, which is what's displayed at the end of this post. It's also possible to embed dynamic stats, just like with MGP.
However, it's only "right now" stats because I haven't found any since the weekly database sync. Project-GC updates on Sundays, unless you pay them for a membership. With MGP, you can download stats from Geocaching.com (if you are a paying member of Geocaching.com) as often as every three days, so if you time it right, you are more likely to be up to date. It's confusing, but I see no need to pay Project-GC in addition.
I've also found another site that generates stats: Project-GC. Each site has its pluses and minuses. One advantage of Project-GC is that it allows you to download and display your "right now" stats, rather than embedding your evolving stats. So as of when I'm typing this, I have 101 finds, which is what's displayed at the end of this post. It's also possible to embed dynamic stats, just like with MGP.
However, it's only "right now" stats because I haven't found any since the weekly database sync. Project-GC updates on Sundays, unless you pay them for a membership. With MGP, you can download stats from Geocaching.com (if you are a paying member of Geocaching.com) as often as every three days, so if you time it right, you are more likely to be up to date. It's confusing, but I see no need to pay Project-GC in addition.
- Finds
- Milestones
- FTF
- Maps
- BadgeGen
- Souvenirs
pseudoprime has 101 finds on 101 unique geocaches
Data from 2016-03-06
Cumulative finds by month
Finds by month per year
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
All
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
All
| 2016 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
8 |
1 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Month: | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |||||||||||
| Days caching: | 1 | 7 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2015 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
1 |
1 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Month: | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |||||||||||
| Days caching: | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Some numbers
| Overall total finds: | 101 finds in 74 caching days over 3262 total days (2.3%) |
| Overall averages: | 1.36 finds per caching day, 0.03/day, 0.22/week, 0.94/month |
| Last 365 days: | 13 finds in 12 caching days over 365 total days (3.3%) |
| Last 365 days averages: | 1.08 finds per caching day, 0.04/day, 0.25/week, 1.08/month |
| Most consecutive days with finds: | 3, from 2007-08-20 to 2007-08-22 |
| Most consecutive days without a find: | 508, from 2009-04-28 to 2010-09-17 |
| Current consecutive days with a find: | 1, from 2016-03-05 to 2016-03-05 |
| Most finds in a day: | 7 on 2008-05-31; 4 on 2008-05-20; 4 on 2007-08-21 |
| Best weekend caching: | 7 finds, on Saturday 2008-05-31 & Sunday 2008-06-01 |
| Best week caching: | 8 finds, from Monday 2008-05-26 to Sunday 2008-06-01 |
| Most finds in a calendar month: | 15, in May 2008 |
| Most cache types in a day: | 2 (   ) on 2007-10-20 |
| Most countries in a day: | 1 (  ) on 2007-04-01 |
| Most states in a day: | 2 (Utah, Wyoming) on 2007-08-14 |
| Most counties in a day: | 3 (Charles County (MD), District of Columbia (DC), Prince George's County (MD)) on 2008-06-21 |
| Fastest 100 finds: | 3257 days from 2007-04-01 to 2016-02-29 |
| Last 100 finds: | 3257 days |
| Fastest 1000 finds: | - |
| Last 1000 finds: | - |
| Total cache-to-cache distance: | 162,732 km, 4.06x earth circumnavigation, 0.423x distance to the moon |
| Maximum distance in a day: | 554 km, 2 caches, on 2007-08-14 |
| Nearest cache found: | PO Box: Bowie, GC68AFR |
| Furthest cache found: | 16,623.08 km, London Bridge, GC1HNP1  |
| Most Northerly cache found: | N 59° 26.022, Old Thomas / Vana Toomas GC1YN9H  |
| Most Southerly cache found: | S 38° 39.858, The ever-decreasing Apostles GC1857B |
| Most Easterly cache found: | E 143° 06.224, The ever-decreasing Apostles GC1857B |
| Most Westerly cache found: | W 119° 51.011, Lake Lure GC120YP |
| Highest elevated cache found: | 1860 m, Clear Creek Park GCE093 |
| Lowest elevated cache found: | 0 m, Pure Pearl GCG3W3  |
| Cache centroid: | N 42° 59.591 W 086° 17.972 (Centroid is 917 km from home) |
| Youngest cache found: | 2016-02-29, Get Your February 29th Event Souvenir GC69BTF |
| Oldest cache found: | 2001-05-07, San Elijo Lagoon GC8D8 , found on 2007-07-21 |
| Caches found which are now archived: | 32, 31.68% (excluding events) |
| Most FTFs in a day: | 1 on 2007-12-30; 1 on 2008-11-28 |
| Most FTFs in a calendar month: | 1, in December 2007 |
| Most consecutive months with an FTF: | 1, from December 2007 to December 2007 |
| Log Length, words: | Total words: 2,867, Average: 28, (Total characters: 14,821) Longest: GCTP5D 97, Shortest: GCTH2B 2 |
| Log similarity: | 23% (Lower score equals more variance) |
Finds by type
| Type | Amount | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Traditional | 52 | 51.49% | |
| Virtual | 33 | 32.67% | |
| Earthcache | 9 | 8.91% | |
| Multi | 3 | 2.97% | |
| Unknown | 2 | 1.98% | |
| Event | 2 | 1.98% |
Finds by size
| Type | Amount | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Virtual | 31 | 30.69% | |
| Regular | 25 | 24.75% | |
| Small | 17 | 16.83% | |
| Micro | 12 | 11.88% | |
| Not chosen | 8 | 7.92% | |
| Other | 7 | 6.93% | |
| Large | 1 | 0.99% |
Finds by difficulty rating
| Difficulty | Amount | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 51 | 50.50% | |
| 1.5 | 27 | 26.73% | |
| 2.0 | 17 | 16.83% | |
| 2.5 | 2 | 1.98% | |
| 3.0 | 3 | 2.97% | |
| 3.5 | 1 | 0.99% | |
| 4.0 | 0 | 0% | |
| 4.5 | 0 | 0% | |
| 5.0 | 0 | 0% |
Average difficulty: 1.42
Finds by terrain rating
| Terrain | Amount | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 52 | 51.49% | |
| 1.5 | 30 | 29.70% | |
| 2.0 | 12 | 11.88% | |
| 2.5 | 6 | 5.94% | |
| 3.0 | 1 | 0.99% | |
| 3.5 | 0 | 0% | |
| 4.0 | 0 | 0% | |
| 4.5 | 0 | 0% | |
| 5.0 | 0 | 0% |
Average terrain: 1.38
Finds by month
| Month | Amount | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4 | 3.96% | |
| February | 12 | 11.88% | |
| March | 2 | 1.98% | |
| April | 8 | 7.92% | |
| May | 18 | 17.82% | |
| June | 10 | 9.90% | |
| July | 7 | 6.93% | |
| August | 17 | 16.83% | |
| September | 7 | 6.93% | |
| October | 3 | 2.97% | |
| November | 7 | 6.93% | |
| December | 6 | 5.94% |
Finds by weekday
| Weekday | Amount | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monday | 11 | 10.89% | |
| Tuesday | 20 | 19.80% | |
| Wednesday | 8 | 7.92% | |
| Thursday | 7 | 6.93% | |
| Friday | 8 | 7.92% | |
| Saturday | 32 | 31.68% | |
| Sunday | 15 | 14.85% |
47 Weekend finds (46.5%), 54 Weekday finds (53.5%)
Finds by year cache placed
Finds to 6th Mar for each year
Difficulty / Terrain chart
| Terrain | Type: All | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Difficulty | 1.0 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 2.5 | 3.0 | 3.5 | 4.0 | 4.5 | 5.0 | ||
| 1.0 | 41 | 8 | 2 | 51 | |||||||
| 1.5 | 5 | 16 | 4 | 2 | 27 | ||||||
| 2.0 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 17 | |||||
| 2.5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||||||||
| 3.0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | ||||||||
| 3.5 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| 4.0 | 0 | ||||||||||
| 4.5 | 0 | ||||||||||
| 5.0 | 0 | ||||||||||
| 52 | 30 | 12 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 101 | ||
17 Diff/Terr combinations found, out of 81
5 (5.0%) finds were rated with Diff or Terr of 3 or greater
Find geocaches for your missing D/T combinations in the DT Matrix tool
Way to 81
| # | Date | Interval | GCCode | Cachename | Type | D/T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2007-04-01 | GC10PQT | Maryland Marathon |  |
2.5/1.5 | |
| 2 | 2007-04-06 | 5 days | GCN90M | Patriotic Wheaton |  |
1.5/1.5 |
| 3 | 2007-04-07 | 1 day | GCRYHY | Jason turns 30! | |
1.0/1.5 |
| 4 | 2007-05-05 | 28 days | GC5E4F | Yowies | |
2.0/2.5 |
| 5 | 2007-08-04 | 91 days | GCGGCA | The Pitcher Plant | |
1.5/1.0 |
| 6 | 2007-08-04 | 0 days | GCWWHW | The Bells of El Camino Real - La Jolla Shores | |
1.0/1.0 |
| 7 | 2007-08-14 | 10 days | GCKPW8 | Echo Canyon Pony Express Station | |
1.5/2.5 |
| 8 | 2007-08-20 | 6 days | GCHKAR | Something's Phishy | |
2.0/1.5 |
| 9 | 2007-09-15 | 26 days | GCQK9Y | Michaels Mill Cache | |
3.0/2.5 |
| 10 | 2007-09-30 | 15 days | GCRQQ4 | Beachwood Park Travel Bug Hotel | |
2.0/2.0 |
| 11 | 2007-10-20 | 20 days | GCB559 | All's Well In Greenwell | |
1.0/2.0 |
| 12 | 2008-02-09 | 112 days | GC15QAD | Berries and Bikes | |
1.5/2.0 |
| 13 | 2008-05-25 | 106 days | GCK12J | Last stop for a weary traveler |  |
2.0/1.0 |
| 14 | 2008-05-29 | 4 days | GCTP5D | CAM 2006 - Inside the Beltway | |
2.5/2.0 |
| 15 | 2008-06-02 | 4 days | GC1CVGF | 4th parter | |
3.5/1.5 |
| 16 | 2016-02-22 | 2821 days | GC1Y75Q | SPIRIT QUEST: We Remember | |
3.0/1.0 |
| 17 | 2016-02-28 | 6 days | GC68AFR | PO Box: Bowie | |
2.0/3.0 |
Caches with most favorite points
| GCCode | Cache name | Type | Location | FP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GCZ8H7 | The Cologne Cathedral - A Geological Point of View |  |
 Nordrhein-Westfalen |
965 (15%) |
| GC5B4A | Portal to the Past (Köln) | |
Nordrhein-Westfalen |
886 (9%) |
| GCK12J | Last stop for a weary traveler | |
 District of Columbia |
811 (23%) |
| GC4E95 | LAKE-VEGAS | |
Nevada |
687 (11%) |
| GC9D67 | Eiffel Tower | |
Nevada |
591 (9%) |
| GC3B88 | Paddington Dare (W London) | |
 London |
565 (17%) |
| GC2E52 | Mile Zero | |
District of Columbia |
442 (12%) |
| GCB0EB | Toga Party | |
Nevada |
381 (7%) |
| GCCA5E | The Lone Sailor | |
District of Columbia |
306 (11%) |
| GC8B0C | The Actor Really Did Break A Leg | |
District of Columbia |
285 (15%) |
A total of 8,791 favorite points found (average: 87.04)
Oldest caches found
| Age | Hidden | Found | GCCode | Cache name | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5417 days | 2001-05-07 | 2007-07-21 | GC8D8 | |
San Elijo Lagoon |
| 5321 days | 2001-08-11 | 2008-06-21 | GC15F1 | |
"Awakening" |
| 5183 days | 2001-12-27 | 2008-05-31 | GC2E52 | |
Mile Zero |
| 5183 days | 2001-12-27 | 2008-06-21 | GC2E57 | |
Grab A Seat |
| 5138 days | 2002-02-10 | 2008-08-03 | GC3982 | |
Ranch House Cache |
| 5129 days | 2002-02-19 | 2011-09-11 | GC3B88 | |
Paddington Dare (W London) |
| 5125 days | 2002-02-23 | 2008-02-01 | GC3CFC | |
Central Park Guardian (Virtual) |
| 5101 days | 2002-03-19 | 2015-07-08 | GC439D | |
1938 |
| 5077 days | 2002-04-12 | 2008-02-01 | GC4D7A | |
Stone Face |
| 5076 days | 2002-04-13 | 2007-08-21 | GC4C99 | |
Lake & Mountains |
Highest and lowest elevations
| Code | Cache name | Location | Elevation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GCE093 | Clear Creek Park | |
Wyoming |
1860 m |
| GCKPW8 | Echo Canyon Pony Express Station | |
Utah |
1674 m |
| GC16HB1 | Banff Upper Hot Springs |  |
 Alberta |
1590 m |
| GC16HB4 | Moneyed Waters | |
Alberta |
1440 m |
| GCJZ6C | Jumpin' Johnson Lake | |
Alberta |
1435 m |
| GC13TPE | A Walk Through Banff History | |
Alberta |
1423 m |
| GC16HAZ | Limestone Hoodoos in Banff | |
Alberta |
1394 m |
| GCJR3Z | Vistoso | |
Arizona |
860 m |
| GC9D67 | Eiffel Tower |  |
Nevada |
672 m |
| GCB0EB | Toga Party | |
Nevada |
650 m |
| … | … | … | … | … |
| GCGA0N | Big Fig | |
California |
8 m |
| GC1857B | The ever-decreasing Apostles | |
Victoria |
6 m |
| GC2E52 | Mile Zero | |
District of Columbia |
5 m |
| GC8347 | a Wood Chuck's Paradise | |
District of Columbia |
4 m |
| GCMTEA | Vista Spot...Not! | |
California |
4 m |
| GC15F1 | "Awakening" | |
Maryland |
3 m |
| GCK12J | Last stop for a weary traveler | |
District of Columbia |
2 m |
| GC14M63 | A Stroll Around Solomons Island | |
Maryland |
2 m |
| GC6097 | Southern most tip of Asia | |
 South West Community Development Council |
1 m |
| GCG3W3 | Pure Pearl | |
Marmara Bölgesi |
0 m |
Average elevation of all finds: 178 m
Travelled elevation: 12,168 m
| Elevation chart | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 |
33 |
28 |
11 |
7 |
6 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
||
| Elevation | < 0 | < 25 | < 50 | < 75 | < 100 | < 125 | < 150 | < 200 | < 250 | < 300 | < 400 | < 500 | < 600 | < 750 | < 1000 | < 1250 | < 1500 | < 1750 | < 2000 | < 2500 | < 5000 | |
Finds by found date
| Date | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
| Jan | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Feb | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | X | X | 12 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Mar | 1 | 1 | 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Apr | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | X | 8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| May | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 18 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jun | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | X | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jul | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Aug | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 17 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Sep | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | X | 7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Oct | 1 | 2 | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Nov | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | X | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dec | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 9 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 8 | ||
72 found dates, out of 366 (19.7%)
2 FTF found dates, out of 366 (0.5%)
Black text indicates at least one FTF on that day
Finds by owner
|
|
| These didn't make it to the top: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Collected attributes
 0 |
 0 |
 3 |
 31 |
 26 |
 27 |
 1 |
 0 |
 0 |
 2 |
 0 |
 0 |
 1 |
 0 |
 0 |
 32 |
 7 |
 0 |
 0 |
 6 |
 0 |
 2 |
 0 |
 2 |
 0 |
 0 |
 0 |
 1 |
 1 |
 0 |
 6 |
 27 |
 0 |
 0 |
 4 |
 47 |
 0 |
 10 |
 2 |
 11 |
 20 |
 0 |
 6 |
 40 |
 21 |
 1 |
 2 |
 3 |
 0 |
 0 |
 0 |
 0 |
 13 |
 22 |
 48 |
 0 |
 6 |
 6 |
 5 |
 3 |
 0 |
 0 |
 0 |
 2 |
 30 |
 0 |
Positive attributes: 37 out of 66 collected (56.1%)
0 |
 9 |
 0 |
 0 |
 2 |
 1 |
0 |
 2 |
 1 |
0 |
 0 |
0 |
 0 |
 0 |
0 |
 2 |
 0 |
0 |
 1 |
 0 |
 0 |
 0 |
 1 |
 2 |
0 |
 3 |
 0 |
 1 |
 0 |
 0 |
0 |
0 |
 1 |
 1 |
 0 |
0 |
 1 |
 0 |
0 |
0 |
 6 |
Negative attributes: 15 out of 41 collected (36.6%)
Statistics produced with Project Geocaching
Powered by Geocaching Live
Extremely inspired by FindStatGen, a macro for GSAK
All credits for the idea should go to the author of FindStatGen
Austria
Puerto Rico
Singapore
Turkey
Canada
Australia
Estonia
Prince George's County (MD): 22
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)