Page is a not externally linkable
- Google
-- Google SEO News and Discussion
---- Signs of Fundamental Change at Google Search


randle - 5:49 pm on Apr 5, 2007 (gmt 0)


It seems like a fundamental shift happening is now their sorting out the results that are returned for a given query, rather than just rote ranking. And if you’re going to sort things quickly and effectively, you want to start by identifying traits you can use to do that with. Perhaps their working on defining and weighting these identifiers, thus the wild fluctuations in the results you see from day to day. If you were used to being returned high on the second page, and then one day your # 30 or # 950 perhaps they identified something on your site, that told the algorithm “put that page over into that pile”

For years, for all of what I would call “decent” above board sites for the sake of argument here, the algorithm always looked to us like; (A x 4) + (B x 3) + (C x 2) + (D x 1.5) = your score, for that given query. They took all the elements on your site that could help answer the searchers question, (age, links in, links out, trust, hub, text, ect.) all the things that would tell you what that page is about and how well it might satisfy the searcher. Then ran it through the formula, and ranked you based upon how your score stacked up against all the other sites that made it into the pool for that given query. Just a clear pecking order based on your “score”.

Perhaps now we see the subtle (well the implementation sure doesn’t seem so subtle) of the minus sign into the equation as a sorting tool. Negative elements increasingly being factored, aspects of your site that gets you sorted out earlier in the process than you would like. So, whether it’s down 30 places or 940 places, something is subtracting from your score, and you end up getting sorted (ranked) into a different pile than you’re used to. There sticking with this concept, and continuously tweaking it, as evidenced by the duration of the phenomena, and the fact that sites keep radically popping back and forth. Its not a “penalty” as we think about it, but you have factors on your site they think is a “negative return factor’ and the weight of that, depending on the day, gets you sorted into a pile you don’t want to be in. Right now it looks like the formula, or action of this is pretty crude.

For years we have all focused hard on trying to ascertain what signals of quality Google is looking for. Get more of those qualities and you rank higher, your “score” is better, you jump ahead of the guy above you. Perhaps now it’s time to think about what they see as adversely affecting your ranking for that particular query; what aspect of my site gets me sorted into that pile (the omitted results pile? Why was I omitted in the first place? Why was I put in the pile in the 900’s? what caused the algorithm to think I just didn’t belong? How couldn’t my site answer the searchers question? That’s what my sites exactly about! Why is that page supplemental?, uhg the ultimate sorting pile!). I’m not talking about penalties or just outrageous stuff like wacky internal links, key word stuffing, ect., but aspects of a site that would (or should) subtlety subtract to the point that eventually through this sorting process you got sorted right out the back door.

Age, as a signal of quality, seems to be dramatically downgraded in this sorting process. This may be causing a great deal of the present confusion because it used to be such a powerful factor you got thinking your site was better than it really is. Nothing is more intoxicating than sitting at the top for a very long time to distort your reality. For a long time aged sites were like a winning lottery ticket. Get a high ranking site, with some good back links, and just put it on auto pilot; no more.

You almost get the sense their trying to get the algorithm to have the ability to really pick over every aspect, of every site and sort them out quickly. Again if you want to sort through a pile of something, you start with the most obvious trait. If it’s a pile of bolts, you instinctively start pulling out all the 3 inch ones, then on to the smaller ones, ect. If you end up in the position 950 pile, I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with your site, there was just something on it that caused you to get pulled as the sorting process went on, for that particular search term.

If I want to rank high for a particular term, what traits on my site will keep me from getting left standing when the music stops?


Thread source:: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3305282.htm
Brought to you by WebmasterWorld: http://www.webmasterworld.com