triangular vs reciprocal links

[Zuzu]

How does everyone feel about triangular linking vs reciprocal linking? Does is really work better?

[oddsod]

What makes you believe that despite its vast computational resources Google won't be able to discern your three way linking?

[pmkpmk]

I guess it all depends how low you stay below G's radar. Three-way looks more natural at first, but if a site has ONLY three-way links, it raises conspicion. It's all in the mix: a couple of one-way links, a couple of two way links (which IS - after all - natural linking as well), a couple of three-way links, lots of incoming one way links.

[Zuzu]

That's what I thought... My site ranked 3 or 4 for my keywords for the past 4 years, but recently it has dropped to the second page.

[tigger]

like most link development just mix it up with non-recps & recps then it all looks natural

[Precious pearls]

Hello friends,

As far as link building is concern reciprocal links are better than three way links. Reciprocal links are much effective and oneway links are the best. Quality reciprocal links can be achieved only by finding them manually. Because links are get confirmed from you by the provider.

Cheers
P_P

[sugarrae]

Mix it up - mix it up - mix it up....

Don't stick with one type of linking pattern. A natural site doesn't have all one ways, all recips or all triangular. They have a combination of link types, anchor texts and the like.

As far as triangulars being less detectable. If you mapped the links of a site utilizing nothing but triangulars into a graphical format - you'd *see* triangles galore. An engine surely can make that determination without seeing a graphical representation.