Can someone please explain the significance of &filter=0

On some DCs my site is at #1 when adding &filter=0

[JackR]

I apologise in advance if this has been covered before, but I'd like to know the effect of adding &filter=0 to a search string.

On several DCs my site is #1 when adding &filter=0 to a given search.

What does it mean exactly?

[g1smd]

It reveals some clustered hidden results, and is the equivalent of clicking on the link:

"In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 250 already displayed.
If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included."

without having to go to the very last page of results to actually click on the link.

.

In normal keyword searches Google only shows 2 results per domain, and will move a second listing up the page, and indent it under the first listing for that site on that page, if there are two listings for one site on a page. Removing this filter (setting value to filter=0) reveals more listings for each site.

In a site:domain.com search, Google lists a whole load of pages, but if multiple pages have the same title and/or meta description, then they will hide the extra results, and you'll need the filter removed (set value to filter=0) in order to reveal all of the pages that Google knows about.

.

Another useful parameter is &num=100 which shows 100 results per page.

[edited by: g1smd at 12:35 am (utc) on Oct. 21, 2006]

[JackR]

Thanks for the reply.

If a standard search produces #3 for a given keyword, but the same search with &filter=0 appended produces #1, is this positive or negative?

I'm still not understanding whether adding the filter command reflects where your site could be if something were modified/fixed ...

[JackR]

In fact, performing the search

http://<Google DC IP>/search?hl=en&q=widget1+widget2&num=100&filter=0

Gives me two entries - #1 AND #2.

[g1smd]

Yes, blank or &filter=1 hides some results in a normal search.

Removing the filter, setting value to &filter=0, reveals more results and is a clue that something needs to be done to get that page to show up on its own.

[JackR]

The DC in question is not 'live' as it were, but I've been keeping an eye on the fresher SERPs found there.

One final question: What would explain why a #3 position suddenly becomes a #1 position after adding &filter=0 ... and could this result indicate that the site could be #1, but for some reason is being held back (hence the #3)?

[tedster]

Yes, I'd guess that's what it means. But this "-2" filter is different from the "-30" penalty we're discussing elsewhere -- those URLs do not jump higher by appending &filter=0 to the search result URL.

Given that difference, here's one idea. There are algorithm approaches that involve a final re-computation done AFTER an initial ranking is created - localrank, for example. These would theoretically be very common searches, quickly available in a sort of "cached" state.

How does your backlinking look within just the top 1,000 domains within your market's "community" -- paying special emphasis to high-trust links from .gov, .edu or major corporate domains? If there are few or no links like this compared to your competition, that may be a place for you to start. Also, perhaps there's something else out of shape about your backlink profile that you can address.

As I said, this is just a somewhat informed guess -- an idea to explore -- and in no way intended as a definitive analysis of the situation you descibe.

[JackR]

Thanks for the reply Tedster.

Google returns more backlinks for my site than for the competition - many highly relevant and from trusted industry sites.

Could it be due to the fact that most of these links have my home page as their target URL and as such I need to rethink and more evenly distribute the links?