Google's rank in Google

barenzr · #1 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 01:37 PM

I was in the middle of doing a search on Google when I thought to myself, I wonder how Google ranks websites under the keyword "search engine". I thought for sure Google would be the most relevant (at least on Google's own site) but to my surprise according to Google's famous ranking algorithm Google ranks #8! Lycos, Altavista, dogpile, and even Yahoo! all rank above Google in Google's own results. Any thoughts?

I thought this may be a good topic for conversation.

**crankydave** · #2 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 02:59 PM

And the PR on their home page is a 7/10. Guess it lacks content.

Dave

rivux · #3 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 03:13 PM

If we assume that the most important ranking attribute is anchor text then it makes sense cuz I would think that more people link to Google using 'Google' then they do for 'search engine'. Its the downside of being a household name.

**jawn_tech** · #4 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 03:25 PM

Interestingly,

Yahoo's first page does not list MSN.
MSN's first page does not list Yahoo.

(BTW, MSN beta must be live now, because that's what's showing from doing a search off the homepage).

Yahoo lists itself first. Algo? Nah, more like manipulation.

My take on this is, the true search engines are Google first and MSN second, who rank mostly unbiasedly by relevancy (rather, their interpretation of it). Yahoo results can be tainted by monetary and biased factors, imo.

So why doesn't Google appear at the top of their own ranks? One theory could be that Google perceives the query as that people are searching for information about search engines, rather than looking for one. (after all, they've apparently already found one, but not withstanding they could be looking for more) Hence, informational sites appear first in this case. But the first page of results does display both, so it appears to be a pretty good working algo of relevancy.

wednesday · #5 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 03:59 PM

#8?!? They've go to hire some seo expert, to fix this!

barenzr · #6 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 04:02 PM

I agree it seems that Google is the only one that doesn't show bias and actually sticks to relevance even if it means ranking its own site lower and showing more informational sites.

wednesday · #7 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barenzr

I agree it seems that Google is the only one that doesn't show bias and actually sticks to relevance even if it means ranking its own site lower and showing more informational sites.

Wait a sec. Can you find msn i their own search?

And second. Take a look at yahoo's dir.
http://dir.yahoo.com/Computers_and_I...d_Directories/
I'm not familiar with Y's algo concernig crediting directory listed sites. But it seems that they give some credit to the 'Most Popular' sites listed. Of cource this could be a manipulation itself. :) Anyway I would'n make such a statment. What would Y earn by manipulating the results? 'Search engine' traffic?

barenzr · #8 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 05:22 PM

I shouldn't have stated "is the only one", I was more trying to state that I am impressed that Google (along with some other SEs) doesn't show bias.

I guess all of this is for not because I can't see any one actually searching on a search engine for "search engine" :) but it did make for interesting conversation!

robl · #9 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 05:54 PM

Lets all join in and help Google get to the top of the SERPs where it belongs. Maybe a little google-bombing is what they need to help them get to the top for the term"search engine"

wednesday · #10 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robl

Lets all join in and help Google get to the top of the SERPs where it belongs. Maybe a little google-bombing is what they need to help them get to the top for the term"search engine"

Hmm... I would exchage my forum signatures for a 3 way recip from google. That's it, help you to help me. ;))))

freehits · #11 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 07:05 PM

They could always place a giant ugly adword banner at the top, that seems to help rankings.

dewer · #12 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 08:48 PM

Why would google need thier site to be first when you're already at thier site? I don't think they have to worry about people using msn or yahoo, if they are making thier search on google.

golferboy · #13 (**permalink**) 01-18-2005, 10:56 PM

Everyone seems to worry about their Google Page Rank and think that by raising their Page Rank they will be listed on the first page of the generic search results. Not likely to happen, unless you are already there, and then, don't hold your breath for it may vanish overnight!

If people worried half as much about the content on their site, they wouldn't have to worry about anything else! That's how you get the prized top listings!

Or spend some money on targeted advertising from Google and see what happens when you have "targeted" people visiting your site who actually are looking for what you have to offer!

Works for Me!

Jim Longnecker
http://www.Niche-Rich.com

**jawn_tech** · #14 (**permalink**) 01-19-2005, 03:46 AM

Not every site at the top of a SERP will always have the highest PR. But remember the Google algorithm is a combination of relevancy+ibl's. (Actually, CBP has a better formula to explain it).

It's not a 'one or the other' issue. Think of links as the gas, and content as the steering wheel. (anchor links tend to act like both). The PR toolbar is just a broken gas gaugue -- don't trust it (entirely). The more competetive the keywords, the more gas you need to get there, but steer carefully with your content as well because you're competing with others for the best parking space once you get there.

If it's a keyphrase no one else is competing for (an indigenous term in a small field of interest), you've already got it before you hardly leave the driveway.

But it's no coicidence that on most competetive keywords, all the top-ranked sites have higher PR's than those on page 2, 3, 4, 5...

**jawn_tech** · #15 (**permalink**) 01-19-2005, 03:48 AM

Not every site at the top of a SERP will always have the highest PR. But remember the Google algorithm is a combination of relevancy+ibl's. (Actually, CBP has a better formula to explain it).

It's not a 'one or the other' issue. Think of links as the gas, and content as the steering wheel. (anchor links tend to act like both). The PR toolbar is just a broken gas gaugue -- don't trust it (entirely). The more competetive the keywords, the more gas you need to get there, but steer carefully with your content as well because you're competing with others for the best parking space once you get there.

If it's a keyphrase no one else is competing for (an indigenous term in a small field of interest), you've already got it before you hardly leave the driveway.

But it's no coicidence that on most competetive keywords, all the top-ranked sites have higher PR's than those on page 2, 3, 4, 5...