 | |
Another trick to show SERPS including banned sites
Search Engine Optimization Discussion about SEO/Search Engine Optimization (alt.internet.search-engines)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
 
| |||
| |||
|
Another trick to show SERPS including banned sites -
02-05-2004
, 12:54 AM
#2
| |||
| |||
|
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
I'd love to know the answer to this as well as it seems to be the same in my case. "david" <davidking337 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:dd435fc3.0402050742.6618ac81 (AT) posting (DOT) google.com... David, the word filter got my attention. When I do an allinanchor, my sites appear as before (prior to Austin). Someone told me that if you do any allinanchor and your sites are ranked well, but when you do a regular search and they are not, this indicates your site is filtered. I sent a message asking if filtering meant that it was something that I did to cause this filter, or I just happen to be an unlucky chosen one. I also asked, if I am being filtered and I can figure out what causes this filter and fix it, will I climb back to my previous ranking or am I doomed for my mistake? Any comments would be appreciated. thanks |
max, bring my site back from 14th to 1st which is where it was pre-Austin.
Damn this Austin..... !!
Is it a filter?? Anyone?
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Me too, both the allinanchor and the repeating key words up to the 10 word max, bring my site back from 14th to 1st which is where it was pre-Austin. Damn this Austin..... !! Is it a filter?? Anyone? |
allinanchor search it's at about the same spot pre-Austin.
Jay
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
I had one page hit by this and I'm seeing the same thing. If I do the allinanchor search it's at about the same spot pre-Austin. Jay |
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum3/11954.htm
The gist of it is, does the allinanchor search include pagerank to order the
results? It it doesn't include pagerank then ranking high in an allinanchor
search and low in a normal search means you've got the links but your page
optimisation is not as good as your competitors.
Does that make sense?
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
I had one page hit by this and I'm seeing the same thing. If I do the allinanchor search it's at about the same spot pre-Austin. Jay There is an interesting thread at http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum3/11954.htm The gist of it is, does the allinanchor search include pagerank to order the results? It it doesn't include pagerank then ranking high in an allinanchor search and low in a normal search means you've got the links but your page optimisation is not as good as your competitors. Does that make sense? |
that do better after Austin do about the same or a little worse.
PR seesm to not be as much of a factor when you use allinanchor...just good
content..although this doesn't appear to be true in all cases.
--
James Taylor
http://www.AICompany.com
http://www.SEO-highrankings.com
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
I had one page hit by this and I'm seeing the same thing. If I do the allinanchor search it's at about the same spot pre-Austin. Jay The gist of it is, does the allinanchor search include pagerank to order the results? It it doesn't include pagerank then ranking high in an allinanchor search and low in a normal search means you've got the links but your page optimisation is not as good as your competitors. |
Some of my sites - eg http://www.airsouthwest.com/ - are doing possibly
a bit better than they should be (is a local UK airline REALLY the 7th
most interesting site in the world about flights to gatwick, I have to
ask myself, even though I am pleased?)
Whereas poor little http://www.tropicbreeze.co.uk/ despite all I can do
is at PR 4/10 and definitely languishing for terms like 'caribbean
holidays' where it was top ten.
I think the time has come for a new build.
Hmmm.
Victoria
--
Clare Associates Ltd
http://www.clareassoc.co.uk/
01822 835802
--
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
David, the word filter got my attention. When I do an allinanchor, my sites appear as before (prior to Austin). Someone told me that if you do any allinanchor and your sites are ranked well, but when you do a regular search and they are not, this indicates your site is filtered. |
weeks ago).
Allinanchor searches tell you which site has the most links using the
search phrase in the anchor text.
Prior to mid November allinanchor searches and the corresponding
standard search for competitive phrases tended to be very closely
associated (not identical, but close).
This told us Google was basing SERPs heavily on anchor text prior to
mid November.
After mid November there was no longer the strong correlation between
allinanchor and the standard search. This strongly suggested Google
had shifted it's emphasis away from anchor text and more towards on
page optimisation.
This coupled with the introduction of stemming (which wasn't working
that well from most accounts) explained what we saw with webmasters
SERPs vanishing.
Google backed down on some of these changes on the next big update and
so some webmasters got their SERPs back.
Not had the time to check since the very latest Google changes, but
will this weekend as I need to keep up to date. Initial (very quick)
checks suggest anchor text is a little less important than we had
prior to mid November (so quite important still).
Right now I would work on the belief that the Title of a page and the
anchor text of incoming links are two of the most important factors.
The stuff that worked prior to November still works today (headers
etc..), but the exact importance of each factor has obviously changed.
We also know stemming has been incorporated into the algo and there is
speculation of other new things like hilltop etc.. may now be a
factor.
David replace SP@AM with @ to email me direct.
_
http://www.seo-serps.com - Free SEO Tips (23/01/2004)
http://www.seo-serps.com/serps.html - SERPs Competition Entry
http://www.seo-serps.com/seo-consultant.html - hire SEO Dave
http://www.bdsm-lingerie.com - BDSM Lingerie Shop
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
On 5 Feb 2004 07:42:30 -0800, davidking337 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com (david) wrote: David, the word filter got my attention. When I do an allinanchor, my sites appear as before (prior to Austin). Someone told me that if you do any allinanchor and your sites are ranked well, but when you do a regular search and they are not, this indicates your site is filtered. There is no real evidence of a filter (or at least there wasn't a few weeks ago). Allinanchor searches tell you which site has the most links using the search phrase in the anchor text. Prior to mid November allinanchor searches and the corresponding standard search for competitive phrases tended to be very closely associated (not identical, but close). This told us Google was basing SERPs heavily on anchor text prior to mid November. After mid November there was no longer the strong correlation between allinanchor and the standard search. This strongly suggested Google had shifted it's emphasis away from anchor text and more towards on page optimisation. This coupled with the introduction of stemming (which wasn't working that well from most accounts) explained what we saw with webmasters SERPs vanishing. Google backed down on some of these changes on the next big update and so some webmasters got their SERPs back. Not had the time to check since the very latest Google changes, but will this weekend as I need to keep up to date. Initial (very quick) checks suggest anchor text is a little less important than we had prior to mid November (so quite important still). Right now I would work on the belief that the Title of a page and the anchor text of incoming links are two of the most important factors. The stuff that worked prior to November still works today (headers etc..), but the exact importance of each factor has obviously changed. We also know stemming has been incorporated into the algo and there is speculation of other new things like hilltop etc.. may now be a factor. David replace SP@AM with @ to email me direct. _ http://www.seo-serps.com - Free SEO Tips (23/01/2004) http://www.seo-serps.com/serps.html - SERPs Competition Entry http://www.seo-serps.com/seo-consultant.html - hire SEO Dave http://www.bdsm-lingerie.com - BDSM Lingerie Shop |
I agree with all that you have said except the no proof of a filter.
I can show you one.
For the past five years, we have managed to stay at the top two places for
"vacuum sealers" or "vacuum sealer" for a client of mine.
All other top ten sites were a mix of industrial and home-use vacuum
sealers.
Florida placed us at #1 or #2 depending upon which week you checked.
Austin took us completly out of the top 100.
The reason I believe there is a filter is because for all the other search
terms, this exact site is still at the top...ONLY the "vacuum sealer" term
was "changed" and replaced with Wal Mart, MSN adn other sites who don't deal
with commercial vacuum sealers at all. Also, most of the in-bound links,
almost all of which are PR 4 or better are no longer counted by Google. It
is possible they will come back after Google gets its act together this next
"sift"...we shall see.
It also happens that vacuum sealers was the most competitive term for this
particular site.
This same thing happend to "Real Estate Loans" with Florida.
Can this be due to some cause other than a filter?
--
James Taylor
http://www.AICompany.com
http://www.SEO-highrankings.com
#10
| |||
| |||
|
|
On 5 Feb 2004 07:42:30 -0800, davidking337 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com (david) wrote: David, the word filter got my attention. When I do an allinanchor, my sites appear as before (prior to Austin). Someone told me that if you do any allinanchor and your sites are ranked well, but when you do a regular search and they are not, this indicates your site is filtered. There is no real evidence of a filter (or at least there wasn't a few weeks ago). |
I think the example I quote in my OP is evidence (but of course not
the impossible proof) of a filter. Is there a differrent possible
explanation that offline browser x5 puts me at #9 but offline broswer
x4 puts me lower than 770 (can only see 770 results)?
My site is being removed from possible results for this term but not
for other terms - e.g. offline browser IE (2 pages in top 10) was my
previous strongest evidence (SEO Dave doesn't agree this is evidence
as I recall).
So, SEO Dave - differrent explanations ...?
David.
Software author. (please edit my email addr. to prove you're not a dumb 'bot)
Web Log Analyzer by Search Term http://www.1keytools.com/wlabstfeatures.htm
Kybie GetEmAll - Make IE an offline browser http://www.1keytools.com/offline_browser.htm
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.