Forum Moderators: open
A user searches "big widgets" and a page title is also "big widgets" (no quotes) = 100% match
I've noticed that longer titles with a minor % of coincidences works better.
"Big widgets - The factory" would rank better.
I tried several searches and regardless other factors, the 100% coincidences in title doesn't help the results, in fact the firsts results uses to have the keyword just once and something else.
Is that a recognized fact?
Does someone experienced the same?
Opinions?
I've noticed that longer titles with a minor % of coincidences works better.
Is this something you've observed in serps or you've tested on your own site?
My guess is, that if just observed in serps, in may simply look that way because most pages have longer titles. This is conjecture on my part.
Right now I'm seeing that a page with just the exact phrase in the title has moved ahead of us for a phrase we've owned for months. There are a lot of other factors too, of course, which is why you'd have to run A-B tests on the same page on one of your own sites... all other things remaining constant, which they never do. ;)
To add a PS to this, I've always figured that Google might prefer "typical" page titles over just-the-phrase titles, so, for this and other reasons, I've always had extra words in there. With possible Latent Semantic Indexing and peripheral targets, all the more reason to include extra words.
In my world it’s a theoretical problem (exiting enough, don’t get me wrong). I design my titles after what people search with in the SE’s and not after what will give a better placement and people tend to use shorter queries rather then the long ons
Like Adwords, if people click on your link when searching you get pushed up in the ranks. The higher the CTR the higher the page rank.
So if you have a descriptive title+description which attracts people to click more on your link rather than the ones around it, you will naturally be considered more relevant. Even if it's not purely optimized for your keywords.
In theory, if you could reverse engineer their code and send a bunch of click bots at their website you could get a high page rank for your website.
Or of course, you could just end up getting shut out of google. Great way to get your competitor shut out, I would say.
A big part of optimization in Google is making your link attractive to users.
True
Like Adwords, if people click on your link when searching you get pushed up in the ranks. The higher the CTR the higher the page rank.
Completely false - unless the people that click on the link has sites and decide to link to you - that would increase your PR .. but not directly from the CTR's
If a page scores too many points for a search term, Google acrualy loads it.
This happems mostly for 2 word search terms. As the HTML Title is the biggest scoring zone it has the most influence in tripping this flexible filter.
If you search this forum for OOP or "Over Optimised Page" you will no dobt find many threads with examples and theories.
For example, I do not click on obvious spam results. I do click on links that appear to be relevant to my particular search.
Why would Google not leverage the relevancy check that I just peformed for them?
If they have written all that logic for AdWords, doesn't it make sense to use it for regular listings?
Please don't just say "False". That's just a waste of a posting. Tell me >why< you think it is false.
No, it could be manipulated. Manipulating AdWords in the same way would cost you money!
> Please don't just say "False". That's just a waste of a posting. Tell me >why< you think it is false.
Look at Google's outward links. They are not tracked - they are direct to the site. How can they count the clickthrough?
The SERPS can be manipulated? Impossible!
Of all the things hardest to manipulate, click tracking is probably the hardest.
Whereas changing the content of a web page, cloaking, and getting people to link to you is pretty easy to manipulate.
In fact, I could walk you through the numerous technical challenges of simulating a javascript click with all the appropiate cookies set, but you'll have to trust me on this one.
Anyways, I don't think I said click tracking was the #1 determination of page rank. I merely was trying to point out that it influenced your ranking.
<a href=http://www.webmasterworld.com/><b>WebmasterWorld</b> News and Discussion for the Independent Web <b>...</b></a><table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr><td class=j><font size=-1> <b>...</b> Answers <b>WebmasterWorld</b> Member Questions Posted in Yahoo by Yahoo_Mike Yahoo Reps
answer some <b>WebmasterWorld</b> member questions.
-------
Is not tracked: <a href=http://www.webmasterworld.com/>
Surely it NEEDS to go to a google address first to be tracked.
Why would Google not leverage the relevancy check that I just peformed for them?
This has been discussed a lot over the years. From what I can find, this seems to be the definitive thread....
Redirect urls on Google
[webmasterworld.com...]
GoogleGuy - msg #46
We normally don't track redirects on urls because it slows users down. That data is useful though, so we sometimes do random sampling to make sure that our quality is still high.
For links to other threads on the subject, check...
New Link Format in Google results?
[webmasterworld.com...]
function clk(n,el) {if(document.images){(new Image()).src="/url?sa=T&start="+n+"&url="+escape(el.href);}return true;}
..
<a href=http://www.webmasterworld.com/ onmousedown="return clk(1,this)">
You have to be careful when discussing Google. I generally ignore anyone who says what Google does or doesn't do unless they have some sound reasoning behind it.
