Get exclusive CAP network offers from top brands

View CAP Offers

SEORank article From Webmaster World

CrapsRus asked 1 year ago
Here is a good article on Google:

“SEORank article From Webmaster World”

I’ll try to break it down into plain English,as best as I understand it.

Remember I am a full time businessman and only a part time geek so I
look to others for confirmation and possible furtther clarification of
my Geek to English translation <span title=” title=”” class=”bbcode_smiley” />

In the SEORank article 2 hypothesis are put forward.

The old (pre Florida) G Ranking algo and the new (Post Forida) G ranking
algo.

The new is closely related to the old so I will detail the old first.

Old Google Ranking Formula = {(1-d)+a (RS)} * {(1-e)+b (PR * fb)}

There are damping factors in place but what the size of those factors
are we don’t know so I haven’t included them in my plaimn English
example, just leaving factors we can work with and can deliver and/or
register.

In plain English this means the Old Algo would be:

RS (PR* PRLS)

Where:
RS = Relevance Score which is the relevancy of the page itself.
PR = PageRank which is the Toolbar PageRank (as we can’t measure the
REAL PR)
and PRLS = PR Logarithmic Scale which is mentioned in the article as
probably close to 8. (Though I personally believe that it is slightly
lower.)

In essence this means that making your page more relevant to search
engines had a massive effect on your overall ranking when combined with
PR accumulation.

This was witnessed by many many people and an increase in (Almost all)
inward links would mean that your page would rank well for the relevant
keywords on the page as well as unrelated terms on the page.

Once ineard links had come to a page this would increase PR which could
be passed to other pages on site or run by the company which in turn
meant that all pages SEO’s by the same company had the potential to all
be high ranking.

The upside for SEOers was that by delivering relevant content and
ensuring PR increased they were pretty much guaranteed an increase in
their SERP positions.

The massive downside for Google (and probably searchers in general) was
that onpage content and off page linking was relatively simple to fake
and control and SEOers took advantage of this through linking campaigns
(to increase PR) and tactics such as cloaking to gain high on page
Relevancy scores.

G (and many others) were aware of this and so it has been put forward by
SEORank that the post Florida algo changes have incorporated a new
factor, which is the Local Score

New Google Ranking Formula = {(1-d)+a (RS)} * {(1-e)+b (PR * fb)} *
{(1-f)+c (LS)}

Like the old algo there are damping factors in place and again what we
don’t know what they are so once again I haven’t included them in my
plain English example, just leaving factors we can work with and can
deliver and/or register.

The Hilltop algo adds to the old Algo by giving a further multiplier,
the LocalScore Rank (LS)

LocalScore builds upon PageRank by building a score for a page based
upon the inward links to a page that come from “on topic” “authority
sites”

I won’t go into details about how LS and Hilltop works (as there are far
better resources out there at explaining it than I can muster) but in
essence it means that LS has a massive effect on the previously SEO’d
pages for Searched phrases that have marked as needing to be more
relevant and therefore having the LS score applied.

I say the “searched phrases that have been marked as needing to be more
relevant” as it has been put forward that LocalScore only comes into
play for a subset of searched terms. This is because of the massive
computational overheads of working out a LS for a page and the
impossibility (with G’s current architecture) to compute the LS on the
fly for a search phrase.

This makes sense as post Florida there were many phrases there seemeed
to be heavily effected with little change in other phrases.

Scroogle.org kept a list of the phrases they saw differences in and that
info is still available at
their archived site under hitlist.html

It may or may not still be relevant today.

In plain English the new algo is:

RS(LS (PR* PRLS))

Relevance Score multipled by Local Score multiplied by Real Page Rank.

If this is the case then all onpage SEO factors will have a much smaller
effect on overall SERP positions than prior to Florida.

The way forward for SEOing has now become MUCH harder though there is
still hope for an SEOer (white or black hat) it is just that the game
rules have changed!

I still believe it is good common sense ensure onpage relevancy with
great content.

Further PageRank is still extremely important and all your linking
campaigns should continue, though it should be noted that types of links
should be different from before.

Look at links coming from commercially unrelated sites, (links from
abcd.co.uk to abcd.com will help with PR but not with LS) links coming
from distinctly different IP ranges (Get links from servers in different
data centres) and the most important extra work is…..

… a huge extra element of research time and effort should go in place,
that being to find out who the authority sites are for your widget
subject and get linked to by them.

This can be accomplished by manually undertaking the same process that
Hilltop does but for your specific widget area.

Look at the top results for your widget phrases, your widget sub
phrases, and (lets say..) 2 levels removed in the keyword pyramid and
see who links to these pages.

There will become a natural set of authority sites that are obviously
important for a widget phrase and THIS is where your extra effects
should go in building links and relationships with.

But before you do any of the above I just want to refer to Brett’s
excellent article on building for “15k per day in a year”

If your content isn’t relevant then it isn’t gonna work and IMHO Brett’s
advice is more important today than ever before!

Hopefully I haven’t gotten too geeky and simplified the real world
effects of Hilltop and Local Score, if indeed it is the new algo in
place at G!? <span title=” title=”” class=”bbcode_smiley” />

Regards everyone and good luck

10 Answers
Professor answered 1 year ago
Nice find Dennis!
:thumbsup:

Thanks
:bigsmile:

Spearmaster answered 1 year ago
Google is still blind as a bat.

http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:fA0EmZgX3T0J:http://www.gambling.nm.ru/+online+gambling&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

This is Google’s cache of a site ranked #20 for “online gambling”. Look very closely at the bottom of the page, you will see all sorts of highlighted stuff in a font about 1 pixel in height LOL.

Unbelievable.

Spearmaster answered 1 year ago
Another very interesting point which shows that the two engines have a completely different idea of “relevance”.

None – I repeat NONE – of Google’s top 12 for “online gambling” appear anywhere in the top 100 of Yahoo.

And only 5 of Yahoo’s top 10 appear in Google’s top 100.

It’s even worse when you search for “online casino”.

Only 12 sites show up in both indexes. In Yahoo they are all top 50. Google’s top 6 are not represented in the Yahoo 100, and Yahoo’s top 2 are not represented in the Google 100.

Summary – you probably won’t be able to build one page to work in both indexes – and if you do, it’s probably better optimized for Yahoo and only in Google because of off-page factors such as pagerank or inbound links.

Talk Casinos answered 1 year ago
Hey Spear
Yahoo is now a paid inclusion program using Inktomi results until the middle of next month
http://www.positiontech.com/
We won’t know how the real Yahoo results will turn out yet.

Brad

Spearmaster answered 1 year ago
Yup, saw that… I used to do PFI with PT as well.

Now I want to upgrade to trusted feed… and they want $1 PER CLICK for gambling sites.

I don’t think so. That’s likely to be around $8-10K per month… minimum, that is. I don’t make that kind of moolah yet and I am certainly not about to risk it just yet.

Ace answered 1 year ago
The fact that the search results for top ranks in yahoo are different than in google represents the search analysis engines interpretation of relevance. Their algorithms are distinctly different in the way sites are cached and some of the factors that yahoo implements for search relevancy are not even taken into consideration by a google spyder. Which is way it is best for those that want favorable ranking in both yahoo and google to edit their page for that particular search engine. Do a top 10 search on yahoo see the results tweak your page to represent what those people are doing to be top 10 in yahoo and submit once you have made the proper changes then do the same thing for google and perform a seperate submission keep a mirror of both of the pages for future submissions. This is all explained in one of my ebooks and will be available as soon as the new Casino Hideout website is released. Expect the release to be within 4 days! I’d appreciate feedback from everybody once it is posted. Cheers!

Talk Casinos answered 1 year ago
Thanks for the input Ace
May I add this will not work until the middle of next month

So don’t go trying this now

Yahoo will have their own algo soon
Right now they are trying to get away from Google results by using Inktomi

Brad

JasonD answered 1 year ago
That article that was posted nearly a decade ago wasn’t from SEORank but written me

(I am primarily adding this so the records reflect it – thanks )

JillO answered 1 year ago
@JasonD 237608 wrote:

That article that was posted nearly a decade ago wasn’t from SEORank but written me

(I am primarily adding this so the records reflect it – thanks )

Thanks for the update, Jason <span title=” title=”” class=”bbcode_smiley” />

rmeeuwsen answered 1 year ago
@JillO 237634 wrote:

Thanks for the update, Jason <span title=” title=”” class=”bbcode_smiley” />

Are you actually saying that someone knows what the heck he’s talking about.

Just call me cracker face from chesseheadland.

<span title=” title=”” class=”bbcode_smiley” />