SearchEngineZ
Joined: Nov 24, 2003
# Posts: 55
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 04:39 pm
I answered a few SEO queries at Google Answers relating to sudden drops in ranking following the recent Google update.
After browsing a lot of forums I have decided to try and describe what is happening:
Google has introduced a filter:
"Google recently introduced a new keyword phrase filter during its most recent update. Some phrases were unchanged, but many highly optimized and highly competitive phrases were drastically altered."
http://searchenginejournal.blogspot.com/2003_11_01_searchenginejournal_archive.html#106933768963966352
The filter is targeting highly competitive (commercial) keywords and phrases.
Any site that is doing well for such phrases loses the ranking benefit of the following:
- text of internal links containing those keywords
- text of reciprocal links containing those keywords
- those keywords in the URL
and possibly (I haven't seen any proof):
- keywords in the title
- keywords in H1 tags
- high density of the keywords on the page
- text of non-reciprocal links containing those keywords
Typically the page most affected is the home page. Often this is due to linking internally to it with keywords, rather than the traditional "home".
PageRank remains unaffected. Rankings for keywords and phrases not affected by the filter remain the same.
The unfiltered results can be seen by adding -mt-tb.cgi to the search query. This was first mentioned at the Register, prior to the recent update:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/35/33448.html
|
 |
Keensurfer
Joined: Nov 05, 1999
# Posts: 882
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:02 pm
Powerful post! Thank you. 
|
|
SearchEngineZ
Joined: Nov 24, 2003
# Posts: 55
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:04 pm
It has just been pointed out to me that any nonsense word will kill the filter, like -fhtryhfsv
Edit:
er, I just tried it and it didn't work 
|
|
Keensurfer
Joined: Nov 05, 1999
# Posts: 882
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:09 pm
and where would one place a nonsense word?
|
|
Pongo
Joined: May 27, 2002
# Posts: 665
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:14 pm
word1 word2 -nonsense
|
|
Pongo
Joined: May 27, 2002
# Posts: 665
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:14 pm
Any word on if this filter is for testing or will we have to live with it from now on?
|
|
Pongo
Joined: May 27, 2002
# Posts: 665
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:16 pm
>>> er, I just tried it and it didn't work
works fine for me
|
|
SearchEngineZ
Joined: Nov 24, 2003
# Posts: 55
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:18 pm
Here's a real world example:
Befoe the update Charlotte-Eba.com was ranking very high for "charlotte real estate".
The filter has probably activated because "real estate" is such a competitive keyphrase. They currently appear nowhere for "charlotte real estate":
http://www.google.com/search?q=Charlotte+Real+Estate+-mt-tb.cgi
But, with the filter removed, they are at #2 for "charlotte real estate -mt-tb.cgi":
http://www.google.com/search?q=Charlotte+Real+Estate+-mt-tb.cgi
I only know of the filter via reading of it elsewhere. If the trick is working with any nonsense word, then I can't imagine it will ruin too many people's search engine experience.
|
|
DANXtendlife
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 58
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:34 pm
Well hotda*n...
My sites reappear when I throw the same nonsense word at the end that you
used above for the real estate example.
However, I have a few gripes with the filter theory as it stands.
Here's why:
1. My site uses NO text of internal linking containing the keyterm in question.
2. Although my site does contain plenty of reciprocal links containing these keyterms, the new #1 site for this very competitive keyterm does as well. In fact, his site does so unnaturally. In my site, it can't really be helped because my URL contains it. But this #1 site's URL does not contain the keyterm but his linking instructions demand that the keyterm be used...and he has a lot of links.
Others have speculated that the sites that were booted are overly optimized.
This one is inconsistent. The new #1 site is obviously very optimized for this keyterm...but other sites (including mine) which got the boot were also very optimized. Some of the other sites that replaced us in the top 10 are not optimized at all. In fact, some of them don't even use the keyterm at all in any of their text on the homepage.
Again...inconsistent.. some optimized, some not.
Bottomline: my old results are showing when I throw a junk word at the end of the filter? How do we overcome this, if possible?
I'd love to really give it good and hard to Google and try to circumvent their crappy filter.
-Dan
|
|
DANXtendlife
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 58
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:39 pm
Everyone who has any ideas how to beat this filter (if possible) chime in.
Obviously, nobody is going to type any of our competitive keyterms with a nonsense word at the end.
There has to be a way to get around this thing.
-Dan
|
|
gmac17
Joined: Nov 24, 2003
# Posts: 5
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 05:52 pm
WOW.
SearchEngineZ answered ALOT of questions with that post. thanks much.
Now what to do.....
|
|
001
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
# Posts: 64
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 10:37 pm
Well, son of a #@%$#!
I used the same nonsense word and my listings came back! This really stinks!! I have a VERY useful site in my topic and now all my listings are gone because of this crap...and I DO mean CRAP!
Lee
|
|
taudette
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 72
|
Posted: 11/24/2003 11:10 pm
Holy Cow...that does answer some questions folks...also creates a whole slew of new questions...gotta take a break, I'm getting googl-y eyes
|
|
MakeMeTop
Joined: Jul 05, 2000
# Posts: 1714
|
Posted: 11/25/2003 01:17 am
With due respect, this theory was written up here at Jim World early in the thread on the update. But part of the information pposted at the beginning of this thread is IMO, a little misleading.
How urban myths spread - Part 2:
Just prior to this latest update complaints were being made about blogs corrupting the results. The article mentioned earlier in The Register was published suggesting that if people did an exculsion of the fingerprint of the blog scripts, they would see results without the blog entries.
Someone now has confused this exclusion -mt-tg.cgi which was to exclude the trackback script entries from blogs, and remove blog entries from search results with the method of identifying phrases that are deemed suitable for Google's new "is it SEOd" algo which can be seen by entering any obscure group of letters such as -asdfh, after a search term.
They are not related in any way shape or form.
This is NOT some bug in Google, nor a virus in your browser - but the new Google algo.
Please read the update and irregular results threads too.
All information is here
|
|
drongo
Joined: Jun 28, 2000
# Posts: 511
|
Posted: 11/25/2003 02:47 am
Works for me!!!
I get back all our number one spots for our different sites which have all been blown to oblivion with this "filter" that Google is using.
What can be done?? This is crazy.
|
|
excell
Moderator
Joined: Mar 19, 2001
# Posts: 14502
|
Posted: 11/25/2003 02:58 am
Well I can tell you one thing.. I am off to use a different search engine right now, because I simply cannot find what I want!
|
|
REMbraNT
Joined: Jul 29, 2002
# Posts: 82
|
Posted: 11/25/2003 04:33 am
very clever filter. People won't find you because you have what they need. Thumbs up google.
|
|
excell
Moderator
Joined: Mar 19, 2001
# Posts: 14502
|
Posted: 11/25/2003 04:49 am
rofl.. exactly rembrant! I was thinking that myself..
take a term such as search engine optimisation... LOL... nope don't wanna show the good ones, only a few, the spammers and some wild goose chases for you!
|
|
rezgurl
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 6
|
Posted: 11/25/2003 04:51 am
You wrote:
Any site that is doing well for such phrases loses the ranking benefit of the following:
- text of internal links containing those keywords
- text of reciprocal links containing those keywords
- those keywords in the URL
and possibly (I haven't seen any proof):
- keywords in the title
- keywords in H1 tags
- high density of the keywords on the page
- text of non-reciprocal links containing those keywords
OK (I'm a non tecky/SEOy) -- if my previous top position was 1-3 for the past year under "executive resumes" (it was) and NOW that search can't even find me within the first 7 pages, then that's what happened?
Now when it finds me, the description showing up on Google is my contact info, NOT the description I worked so hard to build..am I right?
|
|
laurieb
Joined: Nov 03, 2003
# Posts: 17
|
Posted: 11/25/2003 05:16 am
I wonder which genius at Google decided that, since a site is a professional, properly optimised one, it is automatically spam. With logic like that he/she should be in politics.
|
|
