| 10:48 pm on Aug 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Backlinks were updated on cw and gv at least in the last few days.
| 11:37 pm on Aug 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
What "new" update?
|I'm seeing pages with no keywords in the title and only mentioned once rank far better than ones with keywords in the title. |
You have to take keywords in the anchor text into consideration.
| 11:38 pm on Aug 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Its a weird update i agree. Some of my sites have maintained their number one positions which others have dropped to god knows where (i cant find them!)
No idea why really. Do you guys think google is penalising for too many links out of a site?
| 12:32 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I do not believe G has changed the ranking part of their algo very much. I am sure the change has been from a static algo with monthly, or thereabouts, updates. To a rotating / freshbot style algo, with ongoing updates.
| 1:22 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm not seeing any dramatic changes, or evidence of an algo change.
There is no new algo.
There hasn't been a new algo for ages- if ever.
If anything's changed it probably has more to do with link rot.
Additionally, if the marching feet of the masses count for anything, if something as dramatic as an algo change had occurred, there would be far more people posting to this thread.
So far, for the past 12 hours or so, only one other is drinking in the same pub with you.
Welcome to Webmasterworld!
[edited by: martinibuster at 1:29 am (utc) on Aug. 11, 2003]
| 1:25 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yeah backlinks are definitly still the key factor. I am finding now I can work with on site optimisation (New Zealand spelling) to an extent and within 3 or four days you see the results on google no more waiting a month :) Is time really speeding up?
| 2:22 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I have been seeing werid results for a while now.
I drive a toyota celica... So while searching for "toyota parts" all the results look great, but add in the word "celica" in between the two and the results get very messed up.
You be the judge. I have seen many other searches like this too.
| 2:31 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
What's weird about it?
| 2:45 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Please recognize that "optimisation" is the English spelling or I will start telling jokes about how Kiwi's "pronunce" things and their strange desire for whacky baccy surnames!
Nothing too weird I see, everything seems as GoogleGod would want it ;-)
| 3:01 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Please recognize that "optimisation" is the English spelling |
It's also the New Zealand spelling for the word.
| 3:14 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
One of the joys, I believe, of using these forums. Is the good nature and often friendly banter between us. Sorry you left your meds at home ;-)
| 3:27 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Bringing this back on topic (ugh, chill out MB, chill out... where'd I put my martini? Uh- oh there it is.)
Ok, bringing this thread back on topic, despite what I said above about there being no new algo, I do see the effects of the rolling algo. For instance, I was fishing for keywords and evaluating the future victims, ahem- I mean possible competitors, and when I hit the back button on my browser I saw two new sites in the serps, and the previous sites were knocked down by two pegs.
For the observational reasons I've outlined above, this is not evidence of a new algo, but rather the effect of the same rolling algo we've been seeing all along.
I've also suspected that if there were to be a monthly recalculation, then this weekend would probably be it. But I'm not seeing it. Just the same rolling update.
| 3:35 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
i think something is up. i have watched my main "competitor" for a particular keyphrase drop from being number one for over a year, to number three last month, to number 59 this week. nothing on his page has changed and his backlinks have been the same for months.
| 4:33 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
While using the unmentionable tool for checking multiple data centers i noticed that for my main keyword phrase there were five different sets of results showing up at one time. Additionally, the results at the same datacenters would move back and forth over a very short period of time. I've noticed this since yesterday. It doesn't appear to be the type of thing where sites are disappearing. #1 and #2 are moving back and forth. #4 and #5 are switching places.
When I started this post I was at #1 on three datacenters. Then I moved to two. As I finish I am number 1 on 5 datacenters. I wonder if this may be intentional.
| 5:03 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
For what it's worth, I'm with mraraju
I've been seeing some very strange results since about last Wednesday. It seems to me that Google is showing off the fact that it can now index very deep dynamic pages that have multiple parameters in the query string.
Every second thing I search for has a deep Amazon page at #1 (deep in the Amazon?!).
I also agree that a lot of the top sites don't appear to be optimised, and don't have the search phrase in the page title. g1smd - I think the point is that Google might be placing a lot more weight on anchor text lately.
Finally - has anyone out there tried using Google Australia? 9 out of 10 results are for the top news publications we have here. I do a search for "pink widget" and the entire top 10 is articles from newspapers about someone finding a pink widget somewhere. Often it is the same article appearing 10 different news publications.
Very ugly from where I'm sitting.
| 6:01 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Now there are three different sets of data for my phrase and I have moved back into #1 on seven of the nine datacenters. About a week ago i dropped from #1 to #2 and those results moved to all datacenters. Now I am moving back in. I think we are seeing the rolling update.
| 6:41 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I am with martinibuster on this one. A rolling algo with minor tweakings happening along the way. I concur with oodlum that last Wednesday a change was introduced with minor changes in the SERPs. I've seen some flip flops among close competitors. My site is now beating out a rival, even though they've got more backlinks than I do. I've got more pages devoted to that topic than they do, and my hunch is that the algo tweak boosted the weighting of that factor in determining SERP placement.
| 10:33 am on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Some of our major terms now have at position 1 some completely unknown players. All pages are deep pages with limited inbounds to it and the rest of their site......limited inbounds reported on all major search engines.
| 10:04 pm on Aug 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
"I've been seeing some very strange results since about last Wednesday"
Me too! Very strange indeed
| 4:48 am on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My backlinks have tripled since the last update, but I haven't seen much change in my page rankings. Do you think the serps are mostly done updating?
| 6:23 am on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Oodlum - I can confirm that the bulk of results in Australia are coming from news websites. After jumping around for the last few months, the bulk of my backlinks date back to April following this recent pseudo-update.
Result integrity is now in my opinion the worst it's been since I can remember.
| 5:06 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm sure there has been a change in the algo but I can not make any sense of it.
Using the widget example, I follow 10 pages (BlueWidget.htm, RedWidget.htm, etc) for 2 terms on each (blue widget sales, blue widget rental, red widget sales, etc)
I have been rated #1 - 3 an all pages for the sales searches and #1 - 10 on the rental searches. Now all pages that have a cache of August 1 and later, I still rank #1 - 3 on the sales searches but have dropped significantly on the rental searches. The drop seems to be a factor of 5 to 10, ie if I was rated #2 I'm now #10 - 20 and if I was #10 I'm now 50 - 100.
There have been no significant changes to any of the pages from my side, so there must be something from the Goggle algo side.
Anybody got any ideas.
| 6:05 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My backlinks have not tripled, but the Goog finally picked up my relevant backlinks from DMOZ and Yahoo, and I fell several spots, but not significantly.
Seems the update's not finished, but if anyone has a different explanation, I'm all ears.
With every good wish to all,
| 6:10 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
is it possible that a new algo twist is incorporating click-through ranking from alexa toolbar data? that might explain the higher-ranking amazon.com sites.
i'm new to this - so just wondering
| 6:28 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I have been and I am a big fan and supporter of Google but lately I think their serps are getting real bad for webmasters. I personally felt Google was at it's peak Christmas time with it's freshbot and over the summer has just been getting worse. There was a time when we webmasters had a clue what was happening and had a nice schedule each month for the update. How I wish it was those days again :(
| 6:33 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
plus now that pagerank is not what it was I am seeing lots and lots of spam. Seeing sites without any incoming links full of spam on top of the serps, beating good established sites.
| 6:59 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think the addition of dynamically created sites has hurt google. Now with a simple script a site can have 50,000 pages added in a mouse click while the person that carefully adds content daily through html may only get his 2 or 3 pages added and then buried.
It's hard to judge though because some of the dynamic sites are good but google needs to slow down how many pages they add to new sites until they get more links or something.