Ranked no 1 and 2 in SERPs but why are they the wrong way round?

A search on Google.com for a 3 word phrase brings me up at number 1
and number 2. This is very nice, but I'm puzzled as to why the page
optimised for this phrase, and containing title, header and
sprinklings of the phrase is number 2 - yet the page just linking to
it is number 1.

Both are showing page rank 3. If the number 1 result was my home page
I could understand it because it has considerably more inbound links.



--

Free washing machine help and advice.

www.washerhelp.co.uk

www.xyzed.co.uk/newsgroups/top-posting.html

On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 13:07:22 +0200, xyZed <xyzed (AT) xyzed (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

A search on Google.com for a 3 word phrase brings me up at number 1
and number 2. This is very nice, but I'm puzzled as to why the page
optimised for this phrase, and containing title, header and
sprinklings of the phrase is number 2 - yet the page just linking to
it is number 1.

Both are showing page rank 3. If the number 1 result was my home page
I could understand it because it has considerably more inbound links.

External links with anchor text? <priority> in sitemap? Have you changed
anything on the site lately?

Best,
Borek
--
http://www.chembuddy.com
http://www.ph-meter.info

There is circumstantial evidence that on Wed, 05 Apr 2006 13:15:36
+0200, Borek <m.borkowski (AT) delete (DOT) chembuddy.these.com.parts> wrote
__________________________________________________ _____

› External links with anchor text? <priority> in sitemap? Have you changed
› anything on the site lately?

Do search engines think that a page that mentions a phrase and links
to somewhere else, is a better result than the actual page itself that
contains all the information the searcher wants?

Is this the power of "recommendation" at work?

--

Free washing machine help and advice.

www.washerhelp.co.uk

www.xyzed.co.uk/newsgroups/top-posting.html

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 08:29:55 GMT, xyZed <xyzed (AT) xyzed (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

There is circumstantial evidence that on Wed, 05 Apr 2006 13:15:36
+0200, Borek <m.borkowski (AT) delete (DOT) chembuddy.these.com.parts> wrote
__________________________________________________ _____

› External links with anchor text? <priority> in sitemap? Have you changed
› anything on the site lately?

Do search engines think that a page that mentions a phrase and links
to somewhere else, is a better result than the actual page itself that
contains all the information the searcher wants?

Is this the power of "recommendation" at work?

Yup.

BB
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/hoarding-pagerank.htm
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/erte-prints.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/dreamsicles/index.html

"xyZed" wrote ...

Do search engines think that a page that mentions a phrase and links
to somewhere else, is a better result than the actual page itself that
contains all the information the searcher wants?
Is this the power of "recommendation" at work?

Not necessarily.
SEs will always try to 'best match' the search term; so a 'recommending'
site may or may not be higher than one recommended, much will depend on the
general status of each site in the SE's view. For example, Google will
consider the 'page rank' (not the Green Bar rank).

So if two sites equally wll match the searched term, the 'quality' of
thesite (as perceived by the SE) will determine order.

But if one is a better match, it will trump other factors.
--

Andrew Heenan
Editor
http://www.seo2seo.com/
Directory of Quality Directories
"I Don't Know A Lot - But I Know Spam When I See It"

"Andrew Heenan" <andrew4 (AT) heenan (DOT) net> wrote > Not necessarily.

SEs will always try to 'best match' the search term; so a 'recommending'
site may or may not be higher than one recommended, much will depend on
the general status of each site in the SE's view. For example, Google will
consider the 'page rank' (not the Green Bar rank).
So if two sites equally well match the searched term, the 'quality' of the
site (as perceived by the SE) will determine order.
But if one is a better match, it will trump other factors.

Sorry - where I've said 'site', please read 'page'

cheers,

Andrew

There is circumstantial evidence that on Thu, 6 Apr 2006 10:01:56
+0100, "Andrew Heenan" <andrew4 (AT) heenan (DOT) net> wrote
__________________________________________________ _____

› Not necessarily.
› SEs will always try to 'best match' the search term; so a 'recommending'
› page may or may not be higher than one recommended, much will depend on the
› general status of each page in the SE's view. For example, Google will
› consider the 'page rank' (not the Green Bar rank).
›
› So if two pages equally wll match the searched term, the 'quality' of
› the page (as perceived by the SE) will determine order.
›
› But if one is a better match, it will trump other factors.

(Quote amended to reflect posters original intentions ie. "site"
changed to "page")

Interesting, although the "losing" page is solely about the searched
for subject whereas the winning page just mentions it several times.

Would it be considered appropriate to post the URLs for further
analysis?

--

Free washing machine help and advice.

www.washerhelp.co.uk

www.xyzed.co.uk/newsgroups/top-posting.html

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 12:12:52 +0200, xyZed <xyzed (AT) xyzed (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

› So if two pages equally wll match the searched term, the 'quality'
of
› the page (as perceived by the SE) will determine order.
›
› But if one is a better match, it will trump other factors.

(Quote amended to reflect posters original intentions ie. "site"
changed to "page")

Interesting, although the "losing" page is solely about the searched
for subject whereas the winning page just mentions it several times.

Would it be considered appropriate to post the URLs for further
analysis?

Yes. Just don't overdo

Best,
Borek
--
http://www.chembuddy.com
http://www.ph-meter.info

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 12:59:02 +0200, Borek
<m.borkowski (AT) delete (DOT) chembuddy.these.com.parts> wrote:

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 12:12:52 +0200, xyZed <xyzed (AT) xyzed (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

› So if two pages equally wll match the searched term, the 'quality'
of
› the page (as perceived by the SE) will determine order.
›
› But if one is a better match, it will trump other factors.

(Quote amended to reflect posters original intentions ie. "site"
changed to "page")

Interesting, although the "losing" page is solely about the searched
for subject whereas the winning page just mentions it several times.

Would it be considered appropriate to post the URLs for further
analysis?

Yes. Just don't overdo

Best,
Borek

Because that's a job best left to us!

BB (ahem:-)
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/hoarding-pagerank.htm
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/erte-prints.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/dreamsicles/index.html

There is circumstantial evidence that on Thu, 06 Apr 2006 12:59:02
+0200, Borek <m.borkowski (AT) delete (DOT) chembuddy.these.com.parts> wrote
__________________________________________________ _____

› > Would it be considered appropriate to post the URLs for further
› > analysis?
›
› Yes. Just don't overdo

The search phrase is, washing machine detergent

This page is about washing machine usage, but ranks no 1 (google.com)
http://www.washerhelp.co.uk/usage_2.html

This one is only about washing machine detergent but is no 2
http://www.washerhelp.co.uk/washing_...detergent.html


NOTE: The [ Related: Washing machine detergent ] link on the "winning"
page was not there before. I added it when I realised it ranked higher
than the actual detergent page so that anyone going to it first would
at least see an immediate related link.

I'm really interested to find out why people think the results are
"the wrong way round".

--

Free washing machine help and advice.

www.washerhelp.co.uk

www.xyzed.co.uk/newsgroups/top-posting.html