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
Although that sounds like an insult, it's actually Bob's way of saying, "Well done!" -- and I agree with him