One way VS Reciprocal

[a3196]

Hi, everyone,,,

I have a question,,,

I heard one way link is better than reciprocal....right???

My question is how much better???

Will you get one one-way link or two reciprocal links??(other things remain same)

Thanks in advance

[dfsweb]

I'm sure Compar will be able to tell you exactly how better a one-way link is, as compared to a reciprocal link. :) In the meantime, let me give it a shot!

Consider this in terms of PR:
For each outgoing link from your website, your site passes some of it's PR to the site you link to.
For each incoming link to your website, your site gains PR from the site that links to yours.

So, obviously with a one-way link, you gain some PR and don't lose any. But, with a reciprocal link you gain PR as well as lose some of it. It's two steps forward and one step back.

Moreover, there is some speculation that Google has (or might, in the future) disregard reciprocal links ...... especially as reciprocal links become more and more common.

BUT, don't forget that although you might not gain much in terms of PR by getting reciprocal links, you will still get some quality traffic your way if you exchange links with the right kind of websites.

[dcristo]

Will you get one one-way link or two reciprocal links??(other things remain same)

I would go the one way if all else was equal.

[ferret77]

out side of being more professional I'm not sure one way links are worth anymore then recip

but most of my links are recip so maybe my judgement is off

I found an interesting case study on that sort of shows how powerful recips are

oh acutally it the serps changed now anyways there was an instance of where a PR 7 or 8 site who is a jupiter media partner, with like 10,000 backlinks got knocked out the top position by a guy with a copy of zues

but now he is back ahead, the zues guy is like a spot behind him

pretty funny actually paying 5000 a month for links and someone just trades a bunch of links and gets in front of you

hilarious, link trading is great. Its like you hold onto your precious image and me and my link partners will run right over you

I don't know are one way links not effected by the 'sandbox'

I think they are, but some else could answer that better

[roadies]

Its best to get a mix. I try for a 1/5 or so ration of one way to reciprocal links.

But really, I don't spend that much energy on worrying about one way or reciprocal. I'd rather take extra time identify the sites that meet my traffic ranking, related content, and PR criteria then based on how badly I want the link is how I consider which way I should approach them.

[compar]

I'd answer these question if I was anyway reasonable sure I knew the answer. But right now I'm not sure what the hell Google is doing. The best ranking site I have is doing it almost exclusively on reciprocal links.

Then I have sites with 1,000s of links and none of them reciprocal that don't rank anywhere. Come to think of it the one thing they do have in common is a couple of 2,000 links from every page in a particular forum's archive. Maybe I should get all those links removed and see what happens.

I also have a page SEO Services (http://www.compar.com/internet/seo.html) that ranks #1 and it has no reciprocal links, but uses links from the coop ad network.

Look at the McDar experimental page. There isn't hardly a single link to that site from a thematically related page and it rank #5 today and has been as high as #2. It also uses the identical anchor text for every single inbound link.

So the long and the short of it is nobody knows for sure and if they tell you they do you can always find pages that tend to prove exactly the opposite. Frankly it is tough time to be in the SEO business right now with all the changes going on at all the major search engines.

[Estrange]

I would prefer to exchange links with the sites containing relevant content of mine.
I believe that for Google eyes, ibls from relevant content has determined as valuable backlink.
Also Gbot will visit your site more frequently by following links from those sites.

[compar]

I would prefer to exchange links with the sites containing relevant content of mine.
I believe that for Google eyes, ibls from relevant content has determined as valuable backlink.
Also Gbot will visit your site more frequently by following links from those sites.
I'd like to see any proof of that.

1. My SEO Service page is #1 based almost exclusively on the coop network. How many of those link do you think come from relevant pages????

2. The McDar page is #5 and doesn't have a single link from a relevant page.

All this relevant page stuff is wishful thinking as far as I'm concerned. There is just too much evidence that you can rank in the top ten without it, to believe that it is true.

And as far as the frequency of G-bot visits I've never heard anyone suggest before that it is a function of the relevance of the page the links are on.

1. It is commonly believed that the higher PR sites get visited more often. And that is probably the only value of PR in today's algorithm.

So if you have a link from a high PR page, or if your page has a high PR, it will get crawled more often. Nothing to do with relevancy of the link page.

[Estrange]

I'd like to see any proof of that.

1. My SEO Service page is #1 based almost exclusively on the coop network. How many of those link do you think come from relevant pages????

Proove it then


2. The McDar page is #5 and doesn't have a single link from a relevant page.

All this relevant page stuff is wishful thinking as far as I'm concerned. There is just too much evidence that you can rank in the top ten without it, to believe that it is true.

And as far as the frequency of G-bot visits I've never heard anyone suggest before that it is a function of the relevance of the page the links are on.

Well now you've heard then. I didn't mention Gbot visit frequency is depending your relevant ibls. Basically I said more ibls more Gbot visits, got it?

1. It is commonly believed that the higher PR sites get visited more often. And that is probably the only value of PR in today's algorithm.

Seems like you know so many things about Google algorithm. How about a site with pr2 has been "DEEP CRAWLED" by Gbot everyday? ummm something is being in contradiction with your "Today's Algortihm" eh?

So if you have a link from a high PR page, or if your page has a high PR, it will get crawled more often. Nothing to do with relevancy of the link page.
Read it carefully, soon you will understand....

[minstrel]

Consider this in terms of PR:
For each outgoing link from your website, your site passes some of it's PR to the site you link to.
For each incoming link to your website, your site gains PR from the site that links to yours.

So, obviously with a one-way link, you gain some PR and don't lose any. But, with a reciprocal link you gain PR as well as lose some of it. It's two steps forward and one step back.
You don't "lose PR" either way. "Passing on" PR does not mean subtracting it from the page doing the passing. That's the myth of "PR leakage" -- it doesn't exist.

[minstrel]

I heard one way link is better than reciprocal....right???
No. Wrong.

[roadies]

Proove it then


Thems fightin words, estrange!

[roadies]

Well now you've heard then. I didn't mention Gbot visit frequency is depending your relevant ibls. Basically I said more ibls more Gbot visits, got it?

That almost makes sense. If crawler is out and about on a referring site, sees the link to your site, you'd think it would follow it.

Seriously thought, it would be an interesting project to graphically map googlebot hits during the day, what exact page it is coming in on and the referring url too. Logs give you an idea, but a Map would probably be eye-opening.

[Googles76]

Consider this in terms of PR:
For each outgoing link from your website, your site passes some of it's PR to the site you link to.
For each incoming link to your website, your site gains PR from the site that links to yours.

So, obviously with a one-way link, you gain some PR and don't lose any. But, with a reciprocal link you gain PR as well as lose some of it. It's two steps forward and one step back.

I don't get it, how do you get one-way links? It's like you contact someone and ask them to link back to you, but you don't link back to them, who would agree to that? :confused:

[dfsweb]

I don't get it, how do you get one-way links? It's like you contact someone and ask them to link back to you, but you don't link back to them, who would agree to that? :confused:

There are heaps of directories out there that will link to your site without a reciprocal link.

And, of course if your website is really worth it, prople will link to it in any case. How many people do you think Google contacts for their BLs? :D

[dfsweb]

You don't "lose PR" either way. "Passing on" PR does not mean subtracting it from the page doing the passing. That's the myth of "PR leakage" -- it doesn't exist.

Not meaning to start another argument about PR, but I read somewhere (and a lot of people believe this) that the total PR is conserved. A bit like the law of conservation of energy in physics ..... the total PR is conserved. So, if the PR of one page goes up, another page's PR goes down. When you add a new page to your website, your site's overall PR goes up and the PR is again re-distributed when the next PR update takes place.

Of course, just because I believe it doesn't mean it's true, because like you I don't know how the real PR algorithm works! :)

[Estrange]

That almost makes sense. If crawler is out and about on a referring site, sees the link to your site, you'd think it would follow it.

Seriously thought, it would be an interesting project to graphically map googlebot hits during the day, what exact page it is coming in on and the referring url too. Logs give you an idea, but a Map would probably be eye-opening.

As I can tell from my observations roadies;
For our company site (it's an old domain and a few ibls)
GBot only visits once everyday, crawls all pages.
But everytime the order of the crawled pages changes.
First of all it crawls root of the domain (I think it finds default page which is index.htm for our site), then it is random, don't know why really.
But I believe that, as you said, if GBot finds our site link on another site while it is crawling that site, it puts in a some kind of que and it follows that link when it needs to.
So if you have more ibls, the chance that your site is being crawled more frequently.

[Will.Spencer]

hilarious, link trading is great. Its like you hold onto your precious image and me and my link partners will run right over you

I believe the applicable rule here is If it's stupid and it works, then it ain't stupid.

[HHI Golf Guy]

So if you have a link from a high PR page, or if your page has a high PR, it will get crawled more often. Nothing to do with relevancy of the link page.

At this time I don't think that relevancy plays a part in G's link algo, but it does seem like the next logical step within the next year or two.

[roadies]

As I can tell from my observations roadies;
For our company site (it's an old domain and a few ibls)
GBot only visits once everyday, crawls all pages.
But everytime the order of the crawled pages changes.
First of all it crawls root of the domain (I think it finds default page which is index.htm for our site), then it is random, don't know why really.
But I believe that, as you said, if GBot finds our site link on another site while it is crawling that site, it puts in a some kind of que and it follows that link when it needs to.
So if you have more ibls, the chance that your site is being crawled more frequently.

It's always been a theory of mine. Only way to logically explain gbot's randomness.

[gchaney]

The crawl is really based upon the number of I/B/L. The more links pointing to your site, the more your site is likely to be crawled frequently. Remember, bots follow links. So if the sites linking to you have lots of i/b/l you get lots of hits...it's all about who links to who links to who links to who


lol

The more links to you, the higher the odds. PR is not relevant other than the fact it typically means you have lots of who links to who links to who links to who....lol

And yes, i still do reciprical links and yes it does work and no I don't look at PR I look at content and the quality of the site.

As far as if G discounts and does away with non-relevant links..well...G will become a "Non-Relevant" search...lol

What makes it hard for anyone to determine what does and does not work in optimization...is the sandbox. Hense the purpose. Tough to read what is going on when it takes 8 months to see the results of anything you do. You end up with wild things like:

Reciprical linking is dead so I better not do it....Ummmm....ok...but when you need 2000 quality links to attain #1 for just ONE kw, you show me the 2000 directories you plan on getting those links from....

You think you'll build "natural one way links" using great content? Dream on. The average site has no chance. The good news is, if you hold your breath long enough, you'll only pass out....lol

Google wants you to do things the way they think they should be done. Ummmm hello...WAKE UP.......doing things the way Google wants them done meant 99.9% of sites competing for .00001% or the top ten positions for any given KW will NEVER.... let me put some additional emphasis on this....NEVER have a chance to compete in a given industry.....

So, if you think you can compete through "natural" linking, I'll be, along with many others, waiving to you from the top....lol

Cheers

[compar]

So, if you think you can compete through "natural" linking, I'll be, along with many others, waiving to you from the top....lol

Cheers
A very fine post for a Grunt :)

[minstrel]

A very fine post for a Grunt
Although that sounds like an insult, it's actually Bob's way of saying, "Well done!" -- and I agree with him :eek: