Google is still the king of engines

The internet is changing second by second and the results have to change in order to be relevant. From an SEO perspective, it sucks that Google isn't consistent, but if they were consistent, we'd all have it figured out and wouldn't need to be here talking about it

 

Please don't assume that compar is in any way representative of or typical of all Canadians... he's barely representative of himself most of the time

 

Whaaaa, whaaaa...Alabama, only 2 things I know that come from there Steers and Queers

Your point is good. I will agree that Google has been very inconsistant in the past couple years but that's intentional and part of their ranking algo. There are people like Compar who try to break it down...That's what Google doesn't want. So when you say the only consistant thing about Google is its inconsistancy it's part of the game, and quite deliberate, IMO.

All we can do is live for today and enjoy top ranking moments because tommorrow always comes with no guarantee in SERPS.

EDIT: Opps, sorry it's 'Texas' NOT 'Alabama'. What was I thinken? Thanks for the message on that Private Cowboy, topped up with some green! I was thinken I might get some red for that. Texas and Alabama are still geographically close ;-).

 

One of the frustrating things about particpating in a forum like this is that no matter how hard you try to be concise and logical in what you write people tend only to read or understand depending on their own biases. Minstrel is sure that nobody ever talks about Google in the abstract, but only in terms of their own pages or ranking. So that he cannot see the logic in any arguement, but is always looking for what one is saying about his/her own page.

In any case enough of that. I didn't pay particular attention to Homer's thread quoted above the first time I read it, but he may just have offered the best possible explanation for the ranking of the page we are talking about. Indeed it does not have, or use, the precise keyword or search term in content or in anchor text, but the implementation of LSI/LSA as he suggests would be a possible explanation for the page's SERP placement.

Has anyone else seen pages place well in the SERPs for what I would call "semantic relevance" as opposed to anchor text or keyword matches or relevance?

 

I don't necessarily assume that but I'm sure you can see why someone might assume that.

But actually, the main problem I have with posts like yours is the assumption that if Google doesn't produce the results you want, whether it involves your personal sites or not, you immediately go to the "Google Is Broken" song. You might learn a lot more and be a lot less annoying if you simply asked, "Why is this result being delivered up?" instead -- that would be much more likely to elicit some analysis and insights than that same old tired song.

 

Yep....

I have a prominent page (kind of ugly at that) that is optimized for 'audience response systems' and 'audience voting systems'. About 4 months ago, I added 'classroom response systems'. (three phrases for one page... ughhh)

Interestingly, about a month ago in reviewing logs I noticed a G referral that used the phrase 'student response systems'. I know my site well, and there was no mention of the word student on-page or in BL anchor. I checked SERPs and that page ranked about #18 in a pool of about 13 million.

It seems to me that LSI/LSA is the likely reason for the association between the words student and classroom, as I have been unable to find any other reason.

I have since added the phrase on-page and have secured 2 or 3 BLs with the phrase in anchor. As a result, the page has moved from #18 to #4 in the past month, beating out a number of .edu's some which have the exact phrase in title.

/*tom*/

 

Compar: Glad I was able to help you. Do you use ~ when querying Google? Like this
1) With tilda
2) No tilda

Look at the 'bolded' term in serps. This may assist you in determining what Google sees as synonyms.

 

That's too much. I've learned two new things in one day. I'd never used the tilda search before. Thanks Homer.

Well actually I've learned three things. But I sort knew the third thing. Today just confirmed it. Minstrel is an arrogant, conceited pain in the ass. Can you imagine anyone more annoying than someone who would write

Minstrel you own the patent on "annoying". I abandon the field. There is no competetion. Could you just please confine your annoying superiority to threads where I'm not present. I'll make you a deal. I'll stay out of your threads if you'll stay out of mine.

 

No, compar... you had that title sewn up before I was even born.

 

I think this may further explain what might be considered inconsistancy. In fact, what is happening here is synonomous terms are part of the picture, which may create the illusion of inconsistancy. Some more brilliance from the Google crew.

Here are some synonyms that I have seen in this case...

Pharmacy- Drugs, Prescriptions, medication. I have determined this by using the tilda under keywords 'Online Pharmacy'

With this in mind it apppears as though content is king...but NOT duplicated content, original content referencing synomous terms on your subject.

Compar and Minstrel, is 3 Canadians in one thread too many I wonder .

 

This just in: Canada has bombed the Baldwins... again...

 

I always thought the Baldwins had connections with Osama Binladen.

 

Nah, just the fat one.

Wait, that didn't help at all.

 

Wait now, which Balwins are we talking about?

 

yeah google is still doing ok i guess

 

Let's hope the Microsoft and Yahoo combination of Bing can make it a fairer share of the market

 

there is no doubt in this but BINg is a big threat to google!!

 

I think Google is always the king of all other engines.