homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.20.34.144
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 35 message thread spans 2 pages: 35 ( [1] 2 > >     
Correct me if I am wrong...
all opinions please
BennyBlanco

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 10:10 pm on Oct 11, 2004 (gmt 0)

... but if you have a site with a decent PR, which is #1 for allinanchor, #1 for allintext, and #1 for allintitle... plus your URL is the EXACT phrase you are targeting......

Wouldn't you think the site would at least crack the first few pages in the SERPs? One of my sites is in this exact category, however we cannot crack the first 10 (thats right, 10) pages in G. Could the SERPs be lagging from the recent update?

I don't know, but it seems wrong that it should be soo hard for such a specific site to succeed--doing everything along G-lines. Oh how I long for the old days. This site would be making a ton :)

 

lazycat

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 11:43 pm on Oct 11, 2004 (gmt 0)

I see the same thing with my new site. #1 for the allinwhatevers, lots of on theme backlinks, varied anchor text etc. but ranking nowhere for any of those target terms...but picking up weak traffic from obscure ones.

From reading here I guess it shows all the traits of being in the sandbox and it's just a case of waiting it out.

MetropolisRobot

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 11:54 pm on Oct 11, 2004 (gmt 0)

Or a randomness value. What if Google were well smart and applied a random value to every site and updated this random value once every now and then. There you are wondering why you have slipped from 5 to 11, when really Google has given you a +6 just because it feels like it. To you it's the end of the world and you spend hours and hours trying to work out why.

The penaly for google is not too bad. Hey you are still highly ranked in the search results, but their "algorithm" is a bit more opaque and that suits them fine.

Or do i see shadows?

Mozart

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 5:45 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

MR,

that's an idea that I first had about 1 1/2 years ago and mentioned it in another thread. There are still moments where I think that might be the case....

Mozart

BigDave

WebmasterWorld Senior Member bigdave us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 5:59 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

#1 for allinanchor, #1 for allintext, and #1 for allintitle

Could you tell me where google states that any allin[whatever] search ranks according to that term in [whatever].

What google states is that they just limit the results to those that have that term in that location. They never state that they rank according to that. In fact, to think such a thing would be idiocy when it comes to allintitle.

walkman



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 6:08 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

"Or a randomness value. What if Google were well smart and applied a random value to every site and updated this random value once every now and then. There you are wondering why you have slipped from 5 to 11, when really Google has given you a +6 just because it feels like it. To you it's the end of the world and you spend hours and hours trying to work out why.
The penaly for google is not too bad. Hey you are still highly ranked in the search results, but their "algorithm" is a bit more opaque and that suits them fine.

Or do i see shadows? "

I doubt it. People want the most relevant results, not a SERPS lottery winner...

wanderingmind

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 6:12 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

Right BigDave. On the other hand, what COULD google be ranking us for the allin: queries then? Has anyone got a clue on how Google ranks the Allin SERPS then?

My feeling is that yes, google ranks you according to title, anchir, url etc without any hassles for those queries.

But for real SERPs, a host of other factors -
age of site
age of page
changes/ fresh content on page
keyword density in relation to allin parameters..

specific deeplinks to the page (like hey, u are no. 1 on all allins, lets see how many ur individual backlinks that page of urs has got!)

now u Allin dudue, lets see how big a site u got. 100 pages? Get outta here. Come back when u got 10,000.

exact_phrase_in_URL? Lets discount you just a bit, shall we?

How many link outs you got? YOu are result 11, and you got linkouts to the first 10? You must be a scrapper site, dude.

I dunno, thousands of things like that, maybe? I think the Allin rankings are just fine. There must be a helluva lotta Allins we got no clue about. What say?

BigDave

WebmasterWorld Senior Member bigdave us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 7:31 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

Other than all the complaints about how the allin functions are "broken", there are at least two things that point to tha fact that they simply do not and cannot work the way most people think.

First, "allin" is just an extension of the "in" commands.

allinurl:fred bob

is the same as

inurl:fred inurl:bob

but the big difference is that you can add an actual "ranking term" to the ones with "inurl:".

inurl:fred inurl:bob joe

which according to google will do a search on "joe" and limit the results to those that have both "fred" and "bob" in the url.

It obviously ranks according to "something", but it is far from conclusive that what is assumed.

The real problem is when you come to "allintitle:". Now, give this some serious thought. How in the hell do you rank a page according to term in the title?

I'm going to be bad and pick a real word. I had dinner down at the harbor, so I will search on [allintitle:harbor]. There are 14,200,000 results. (hopefully they will leave it in because it is a real good example, and I do not have a vested interest in the results)

If they were ranking these results strictly on how they rank on the word "harbor" in their titles, you would expect to find a few mystery pages that just happened to hit the magic combination to rank at the top on how google ranks titles that month.

What do we find?

1. a major company with "harbor" in its name, url and most likely a majority of the anchor text pointing at it. Harbor is the first of 9 words.

2. A National Geographic page about Pearl Harbor. In the URL, and in anchor text. fifth of 7 words.

3. Touchstone pictures official website of the pearl harbor movie. more of the same. Fourth of 7

4. Bar Harbor chamber of commerce site.

5. Commerce department Safe Harbor page.

6. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories.

7. A PR6 pearl harbor memorial page that someone put together.

8. Boston Harbor Hotel.

9. The IMBD entry for the pearl harbor movie

10. Boston Harbor Cruises.

These are all major sites! How is it that they just happened to rank at the top for something that is supposed to rely *just on the title*?

Sure they all have harbor in their titles, we told google that we wanted that. But they surely aren't ranked according to how well their title meets some mystery google "title" requirement.

Sorry, it doesn't fly. The allin commands are simply filters on the results, just like google says they are. The ranking is done in other ways.

piskie

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 7:37 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

"#1 for allinanchor, #1 for allintext, and #1 for allintitle"
Maybe you should consider OOP.

Trax

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 8:08 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

All I'm about to say is: authority status

pretty much explains everything!

WebMistress

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 8:19 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

ok, I'm speaking from a user point of view now...forget whatever's happening to my site on google...that's frustrating, but not as frustrating to me as trying to find something on google these days...I have had to switch to yahoo to do my Christmas shopping.....for example, I am looking to purchase a red wool coat...yahoo gives me something to buy....google sucks...and the red coat is only 1 of many such examples...this CANNOT be the end to this update or google will be the laughing stock. I'm a new yahoo user until google can give me what I'm looking for, like google used to. So, again, just from a rational perspective, google cannot be happy with this index...I don't think the thermometer has popped up yet on this turkey...it ain't done. So relax, and make friends with Yahoo.

rj87uk

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 8:54 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

I was thinking that the allins are in a different database as the main search results...

Well different Databases for each allin... and the main comes from lots of different databases.

When you search for 1 allin your only searching that database?

Ok your number one for all the allins but say they had databases of... age, updated content... backlinks blah and so on!

what you think? or just old mans story :)

webnewton

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 9:09 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

First of all
#1 for allinanchor, #1 for allintext, and #1 for allintitle...
doesnt' ensure that you deserve a #1 in SERPS rankings too. There are many other factors to dictate that.
You are right that you should be somewehere in the top 20 atlease if you have such figures to show. I think the only thing that has not been right for you is your timing of indexing of site. If i am not wrong your site shouldn't be more than 4 months old and infact has not been included by the Goolge in its active SERPS.
If this is the case you need not to worry and rather wait for the next SERPS update which is now long overdue.

sem4u

WebmasterWorld Senior Member sem4u us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 9:25 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

All I'm about to say is: authority status

pretty much explains everything!

Not everything, but quite a lot. It is only one factor in the algo but a pretty important one all the same.

I worked on a site a couple of years ago in a fairly competitive industry. Once the work was done and links from other authority sites came in (mainly informational sites) the site went to the top of just about every important and relevant keyphrase. I no longer touch the site and haven't for over a year. I see this site as now being one of the authority sites in the industry. This is important as it helps keep it above other newer sites aiming for the top.

On my latest sites I am attempting to apply the same principles of providing the best information and collecting the best inbound links. This should - over time, and the time frame is getting longer - lead to stable high rankings and authority status.

Just my 0.02 :)

MetropolisRobot

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 2:07 pm on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

Walkman. I can see your point, but who determines relevancy? Does the man in the street doing a search really care that one site seemed more relevant yet was below a site that was less relevant? So long as they are in the same ballpark they are relevant to the end user...

BennyBlanco

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 11:35 pm on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

Big Dave....

"Other than all the complaints about how the allin functions are "broken", there are at least two things that point to tha fact that they simply do not and cannot work the way most people think. "

Where exactly was it said that I believed these things to be "broken"? And to everyone else who reacted with such fervour, where did I say that these commands related at all to how the SERPs actually rank sites?

The answer to both questions is nowhere. I made neither of those statements in my original post and I always love when people here at beloved WebmasterWorld make up points to argue that were never a part of the point in the first place.

My POINT was, what is the reason for these commands if they cannot help a Webmaster see how their efforts are paying off? I mean, do you really see any avg. Joe schmuck using any of these commands when searching for anything? No way. And if these commands can't be used by Webmasters for constructive purposes, well, then I fail to see the point at all.

All I was saying is that it has gotten too hard for legitimate Websites with targeted markets to get anywhere on G these days. And, for everyone who made out like I was saying that I expected these things to be the magic bullet for rankings, obviously I do not. I thought I made clear that the site is well optimized and has an established PR. "Following Gs Lines" I believe I said. All by their book.

BigDave

WebmasterWorld Senior Member bigdave us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 12:15 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Where exactly was it said that I believed these things to be "broken"?

That statement was not directed at you. That statement was about the several times a month that someone seems to post about how either the allin commands are not working right, or the SERPs are broken because they are not ranking high in the SERPs even though they rank high in all the allin searches.

The statement that I directed to you was in my first post.

Could you tell me where google states that any allin[whatever] search ranks according to that term in [whatever].

And to everyone else who reacted with such fervour, where did I say that these commands related at all to how the SERPs actually rank sites?

Uh, how about here?

... but if you have a site with a decent PR, which is #1 for allinanchor, #1 for allintext, and #1 for allintitle... plus your URL is the EXACT phrase you are targeting......

Wouldn't you think the site would at least crack the first few pages in the SERPs?

What could you possibly be saying if it is not that they are somehow related. If you don't think they are related, why even make such a statement?

My POINT was, what is the reason for these commands if they cannot help a Webmaster see how their efforts are paying off? I mean, do you really see any avg. Joe schmuck using any of these commands when searching for anything? No way. And if these commands can't be used by Webmasters for constructive purposes, well, then I fail to see the point at all.

Wrongo! They are in there for the advanced searcher who happens to use the advanced search option. Those options were put in to support the options in the form.

My girlfriend is a college research librarian, and she knows more about how to use these search options than I do, and she doesn't have a website.

Google has a lot of reason to supply tools like this to advanced searchers, and very little reason to supply them for webmasters and SEOs.

In other words, you don't have to see the point, Google does.

All I was saying is that it has gotten too hard for legitimate Websites with targeted markets to get anywhere on G these days. And, for everyone who made out like I was saying that I expected these things to be the magic bullet for rankings, obviously I do not. I thought I made clear that the site is well optimized and has an established PR. "Following Gs Lines" I believe I said. All by their book.

Are you saying that you somehow deserve good rankings?

Since you don't want me to amke any more assumptions about what you are implying, please state clearly what you expect from google, and what you expect from us.

Birdman

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 12:23 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Who really cares where you rank for allin(whatever). Why bother even checking it? Do you think normal, everyday, users actually use that switch to search with?

Also, PR doesn't mean everything, especially if you are in the 4-6 range. I have PR5 on my own site and get VERY LITTLE traffic from Google :( Do I bother checking allin***? No. What's the point?

BennyBlanco

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 12:39 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

I'm sorry Dave, but you are crazy if you think the TYPICAL searcher would even know what the hell "anchor" is, let alone the command "allinanchor". And wrap your mind around this for a second.

If "advanced web searchers" use these commands for research, wouldn't that innately imply that they DO have something to do with relevance to the end user? And if an "advanced searcher" believes that these commands will brign them better results for what they are looking for, then why WOULDN"T G take that as a sign that they SHOULD maybe be a more important when it comes to SERPs?

I am just posing the question, if your contention is that G has these commands for advanced searchers, what are the main results that they provide... dumbed down search results?

MetropolisRobot

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 12:45 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Face it. Joe public user comes along and types in *search phrase*. If he or she finds anything that remotely resembles what they were expecting then they are fine. This is where most of your hits come from. Not from any one using modifiers.

BennyBlanco

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 12:50 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

That is exactly my point Metro, so what then is the point of having them if not for op purposes? I am just curious, G can do what they want, it just doesnt seem to make sense in the least.

BigDave

WebmasterWorld Senior Member bigdave us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 1:11 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

I'm sorry Dave, but you are crazy if you think the TYPICAL searcher would even know what the hell "anchor" is, let alone the command "allinanchor".

I never even implied anything about the "TYPICAL searcher" and if you actually paid attention to what I said, you would know that.

I know a lot of searchers who ask google questions like you would for Jeeves: [Where can I find a taxi in seattle?]

Advanced features are just that, ADVANCED. That does not mean that they are there just for webmasters.

And wrap your mind around this for a second.

No need to. I've thought about it far more than you have, and you have not brought up anything new.

If "advanced web searchers" use these commands for research, wouldn't that innately imply that they DO have something to do with relevance to the end user?

Yes it does imply that, and it also does, in fact, have relevence in the results returned when you realize that it is simply a filter. Even as a simple yes/no binary switch, it has geat value

Here is the secret to getting your mind wrapped around the way that it works: Think of the important command to be in*. instead of allin*. Allin is just a shortcut. Then go look at the advanced search form.

And if an "advanced searcher" believes that these commands will brign them better results for what they are looking for, then why WOULDN"T G take that as a sign that they SHOULD maybe be a more important when it comes to SERPs?

But you are simply missing the point by looking at this through a webmaster's blinders. It works beautiflly well as a filter on the results.

Anyway, can you explain to me how it is supposed to rank things on intitle, or inurl when you have millions of pages and an exteremly finite data range?

It simply cannot be done without bringing in a lot lf other data points (like PR)

I am just posing the question, if your contention is that G has these commands for advanced searchers, what are the main results that they provide... dumbed down search results?

No, filtered normal search results based on the main query.

BennyBlanco

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 1:18 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Say whatever you want, the fact is that the average web searcher we talk about is growing more and more dissatisfied with Google and its results when it comes to relevance and I personally cannot wait for MSN to release their new engine (god knows when, but still cant wait).

And, btw, don't tell me what I have thought of and how much more you have already thought of it. Just because you have 1600+ posts doesnt mean you know more or less, it just means I try to work more than I post. I was gonna call my mom to say she should buy some stupid shoes for her poodle on your site, but forget it! ;)

BigDave

WebmasterWorld Senior Member bigdave us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 1:18 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

That is exactly my point Metro, so what then is the point of having them if not for op purposes? I am just curious, G can do what they want, it just doesnt seem to make sense in the least.

For advanced searchers. Of course the know that 99.9% of searchers will never use them, just like most people only use about 3% of the functionality of their spreadsheets.

The reason to have them is to appeal to those power searchers that influence others and give them their reputation. it is the same logic as car companies running NASCAR teams.

BennyBlanco

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 1:21 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Point taken, but wow... Nascar and SEO... scary mix at a party i'll tell you that!

BigDave

WebmasterWorld Senior Member bigdave us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 1:27 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

And, btw, don't tell me what I have thought of and how much more you have already thought of it. Just because you have 1600+ posts doesnt mean you know more or less, it just means I try to work more than I post.

But I understand why and how it works and you are still confused about it. I have also been pointing this out to people for well over a year.

Either you have been sitting around steaming about this for a really long time before you posted, or I was correct in my assessment.

I was gonna call my mom to say she should buy some stupid shoes for her poodle on your site, but forget it!

Uh, I think you would only annoy your mom. The site you are talking about doesn't sell anything, it is a review site.

You really should research your spite better.

caveman

WebmasterWorld Senior Member caveman us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 1:36 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

>I don't know, but it seems wrong that it should be soo hard for such a specific site to succeed--doing everything along G-lines. Oh how I long for the old days. This site would be making a ton :)

No disrespect meant BennyBlanco, but this last thought suggests that you need to read...ummm...a lot more in here.

A wide variety of explanations come to mind as to why you're not ranking, but beyond them all, doing well in the measures you note in your first post is only part of what it took to rank well in the SERP's two or three years ago, if ever.

I don't think I have looked at the allin commands in about two years because even two years ago, no one in here could explain to me precisely what they meant, and the more I poked the more clear it became that their usefulness was more mythologic than real.

Basically, a year ago I took them to mean that "here's how my site might be doing IF there were no filters, penalties, etc." :-)

These days, IF they mean anything at all, it's not relevant to ranking well in the SERP's. If anything what surprises me is that anyone even discusses them anymore.

[edited by: caveman at 1:37 am (utc) on Oct. 13, 2004]

BennyBlanco

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 1:36 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Jeesh, lighten up man. See, this is why I usually only post when I have a question. What you have failed to even think of as a possibility is that my original post was simply asking opinion of whether others think it makes sense... even in light of knowing the answers, things can still be nonsensical. I asked if the scenario "should" have different results, not whether it presently does which we all know it doesn't. Later

[edited by: BennyBlanco at 1:48 am (utc) on Oct. 13, 2004]

BennyBlanco

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 1:44 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Caveman, this has been totally distorted. The site in question has everything as right as can be, not those commands, I know they are pointless when it comes to SERPs. We have tons of quality backlinks with great anchor text, we have the on-site factors totally covered, I'm no moron. The comment that you mentioned was a completely separate one from the "allin" comments. Does anyone else here really want to argue that it has grown increasingly difficult for a good site from a good business to rank well, even when keeping up with all necessary trends, practices, etc.? Doing this for almost 6 years now and IMHO, I think it has. And don't get me wrong, I know that the engines are made for the searchers and not the sites, but it isnt like satisfaction is booming with the results being drawn from Google these days. People from my aforementioned Mother to my associates who have been using G since its inception agree on this.

steveb

WebmasterWorld Senior Member steveb us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 26194 posted 2:23 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Back to the point without all the noise,
"Wouldn't you think the site would at least crack the first few pages in the SERPs?"

Yes... unless the site has a problem. Two most common problems are lag time or spam penalties.

All their is to it is those allin commands have their own algorithms. What they are doesn't really matter. What matters is if you are ranking well for these but blow chunks in the main serps, you have a problem. The problem may be of your design (spamminess) or it may be Google weirdness (lagtime) or it could be some other problem.

This 35 message thread spans 2 pages: 35 ( [1] 2 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved