Importance Of Link Text versus Page Rank

[bou78]

Hi guys,

I'm somewhat new to Search Engine Optimization, but after a few months,I have had a fair amount of success in the area.

I am currently administering http://www.massageking.com and we have recently doubled our web traffic daily thanks to consistent first page rankings on many important keywords for us.

On to the meat of my post though:

Does anyone have viable proof of what is more important to get a #1 ranking for a website, total page rank, or number of times that keyword is used in incoming links, percentage of times that keyword is used in incoming links, or they all contain the same value.

Example for my Question.

The top 3 rankings in Google on the Keyword massage tables consists of :
1. http://www.mtswarehouse.com
2. http://www.stronglite.com
3. http://www.massageking.com

I have tried numerous onsite tactics to leap over the top two, and have consistently failed. Now here are the facts:

According to http://directory.google.com/Top/Shop...age_Equipment/ based on Page Rank the rankings should follow
1. Stronglite
2. Massage King
3. Massage Table Warehouse

My presumption is , based on Massage Table Warehouse's name, the keyword Massage Table occurs, in probably 95 - 100% of there incoming links. Sadly, we are not in the same position, and probably 50% of our links contain this keyword, with a variety of others included.

I can not provide statistics for Stronglite for keywords used in link text, but I am willing to assume that they have roughly the same amount of incoming links with these keywords, therefore having a higher page rank leaves us high and dry in the number 3 hole.

I am not asking these questions or making these assumptions because I want someone to give me the magic bullet to knock those two out of my way so I can claim my victory atop the mountain of the keyword massage tables, but more along the lines of a discussion starter that would spark a hot debate over the issue of surmising a list of importance of factors when optimizing a page for a keyword.

I hope everyone has an open mind and is willing to share experiences so that we may all benefit from this post.

Thanks & God Bless,

Travis Boudreaux

For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
-- Romans 5:19

[cbp]

Conceptually and hypothetically, ranking = importance x relevance

Importance is PR
Relevance is made up of a lot of things, of which the most important is anchor text of the incoming links.

All these factors have different weights, which can and do change with time. Currently anchor text rules.

CBP

[greenkey]

just to expand on relevance
here is another 'hypothetical' theory
relevence is most likely made up of in some combination

• link keywords
  on page content
  content relevancy of source site

Probably in that order.

[theshoppingreviewman]

"Conceptually and hypothetically, ranking = importance x relevance

Importance is PR
Relevance is made up of a lot of things, of which the most important is anchor text of the incoming links."

The only problem with that analogy is that I do not know of a bot or search engine that can determine importance. They are all calculating your sites importance from link contents, keyword rich as main factor from linked site with anchor text being equal contributing factor to determine importance or relevance for each searched query.

[Mel]

Search engines do not rank the importance of a page, but the relevancy of the page relative to the search term being ranked.

Many search engines add in an Importance or linkpop factor in addition to the relevancy calculations, on the theory that if many other pages link to that page it must be a bit better than other pages on the same topic as it is popular.

In Googles case they define the PR of a page as a measure of the importance of the page, whether or not that assumption is correct.

[cbp]

The only problem with that analogy is that I do not know of a bot or search engine that can determine importance. They are all calculating your sites importance from link contents, keyword rich as main factor from linked site with anchor text being equal contributing factor to determine importance or relevance for each searched query

You are confusing importance and relevance - they have nothing to do with each other.

Importance is based purely on link popularity - nothing at all to do with keywords.

CBP

[neuron]

CBP says, "Currently anchor text rules."
This is absolutely correct for google.

There is currently no evidence that content relevancy of the source site is being taken into consideration. Right now, content relevancy of the source site is provided by the anchor text alone. Page Title and H1 headings are not being considered, nor is any topological score of the source site as a whole being considered. However, it is widely anticipated that such relevancy factors will come into play at some point in the future.

If you want to rank higher than your competition for particular keywords the solution is simple. Obtain incoming links from as many different domains as possible using those keywords as anchor text. Continue doing this until you outrank them for that keyword. Because new links are currently having a delayed effect on the SERPs, this should give you some cushion to stay ahead of them for some time.

My estimate is that ranking for a keyterm is about 20% on-page factors and 80% keywords in anchor text.

PR is global valuation of a page and has nothing to do with keywords. A page with a low PR can easily rank above a high PR page for ths same keywords, simply by having more links pointing at it using those keywords.

[fathom]

Originally Posted by neuron

CBP says, "Currently anchor text rules."
This is absolutely correct for google.

There is currently no evidence that content relevancy of the source site is being taken into consideration. Right now, content relevancy of the source site is provided by the anchor text alone. Page Title and H1 headings are not being considered, nor is any topological score of the source site as a whole being considered. However, it is widely anticipated that such relevancy factors will come into play at some point in the future.

If you want to rank higher than your competition for particular keywords the solution is simple. Obtain incoming links from as many different domains as possible using those keywords as anchor text.

This is totally incorrect...

Links to a website page "do" have "more" weight associated with it than other factors.

However, there is "zero" evidence that suggests Google has dropped or reduced it ordered rankings factors to "1"... or 1 plus PageRank.

But to be fair let's do a test... remove all your content off your website... and see what happens to your ranks!

[cbp]

If Google wanted to defeat Google bombing, all they would have to do is make sure the anchor text of incoming links match some on-page relevancy factors ... if it didn't then they could ignore the anchor text (currently G don't do this).

I'm with fathom, yes the on page factors are still weighted.

CBP

[clasione]

Keep reading, keep building content and keep building accurate inbound anchors. - you'll move them right out of your way....

[Dave Hawley]

neuron, I Agree with Fathom. To say that content relevancy plays no part in ranking is incorrect. Sure, anchor text seem heavily weighted (today), but it is far from the only factor.

[HardCoded]

I think you guys should have read neuron's post more carefully. He was talking about on-page factors on the source site, i.e. the site that the incoming link is from, probably in response to the post by greenkey, with respect to the notion that the relevancy of the source site to the keyword helps weight its anchor text. I think.

[Dave Hawley]

You are correct HardCoded, thanks for pointing that out. It does however, raise another question in response to:

There is currently no evidence that content relevancy of the source site is being taken into consideration

Is there any evidence that content relevancy of the source site is not being taken into consideration? If so, what is the evidence.