Too many related searches included in the SERPs

[santapaws]

I must say i am getting more and more frustrated that google is seeing related terms as the key term. For example if i search for a name in a town im getting mixed bags of similar spellings of the name. However i already know the name i want, all these similar spelled names are totally not what i am searching for. If i search for a shop in an airport im getting shops in all airports nearby geographically. But i have specified the airport i want a shop in so all these other airports are wrong results. To make matters worse the number one result is a different airport but in the same city. Im finding this on more and more searches, the serps are a mish mash of related searches but so basically related that they are wide of the mark. Its like fingers are veryyyy closely associated with hands but if i search for information on fingers, its fingers i want information for. If the top result if for hands then thats a bad result in my view. Far too much weight now given to related keywords. As i said the problem is because the understanding of related terms is so basic, its not seeing the difference between the topic and the sub-topic.

[tedster]

Now there's a rant I can get behind. I find myself using more plus signs and double quotes in search terms lately than I have in a long time. Sometimes it feels like AltaVista of the late 90s.

Last month I heard a rumor that Google was going to do some kind of recalculation in the area of semantics - and this increased fuzziness could be part of that kind of effort.

At any rate, I've actually started to file a "complaint" when the results are particularly frustrating - by using that small link at the very bottom of the results page that says "Dissatisfied? Help us improve".

[artek]

I find myself using more plus signs and double quotes in search terms lately than I have in a long time.

Amazing, I noticed the same thing.

[MrSavage]

I searched "cheap widgets" and they gave me results of "widgets" and at the bottom said result didn't include "cheap" click here to show results including cheap. How retarded is that?

[Syzygy]

What I find doubly frustrating is that all these 'aids' are actually not helping. Rather, it is just the opposite. They're making results more convoluted and that means more time is spent searching for what I want.

There should be an option that enables users to turn these semantic annoyances off.

[RichTC]

on UK search its even worse, we have loads of results from outside the Uk sprinkled in that are of no use what so ever esp when the search is local specific.

Im also having to use + "" more often and to be honest i cant be bothered. Ive had to dump Google and use bing three times this week to get results that are on target.

At this rate i will change my default search engine to bing, im using G out of habit and its no longer delivering in 30% of cases

[MrSavage]

This is very interesting to hear a lot of your comments. It affirms what I've been seeing. I just think if I'm searching for "cheap red shoes", then that means I'm searching for "cheap red shoes". It's not only troubling from a person searching perspective, but if you think about it, it's very troubling from a webmaster perspective. Is all your efforts into a keyword phrase going to be a total waste because words like "buy" or "cheap" will be auto removed? This is really a HUGE issue if you really think about it for a moment.

[santapaws]

is it just me or is the google way of thinking strangling youtube results too? Way too diverse when stuff i would like to see and know is out there is not showing and irrelevant stuff is piling up after the first few results.

[Hoople]

I too am using quotes, +'s and occasionally - to lower the 'noise' of the proximity matches.

Some of my computer phobic friends have said searching has become more frustrating in '09. Methinks suggesting Bing to them is near as my testing shows them much improved since June in my niche.