Google SERP ripples are now continuous waves

[Webnauts]

Here is some cool stuff Incrediblehelp mailed me today: Anatomy of a Google Filter/Penalty (or how not to do nofollow PR sculpting) | SEO Scientist - Applying the scientific method to SEO
I already have several new customers with those issues.

[deepsand]

Things that make you go "hm-mm."

Thanks for passing that along.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Things that make you go "hm-mm."

Thanks for passing that along.

Brother to be honest I do not go hm-mm, since I know that nothing can go wrong with my work.
As I mentioned some time ago in some threads here, I implement techniques that I never heard or saw elsewhere, and which are 100% cross-search engine compatible, friendly and successful.

And to be honest I am very happy reading all those news, since I think the time came of getting rid of scammers pretending to be SEOs:

Don't Hire a Butcher to do a Baker's Job - Search Engine Watch

Cheap SEO: it’s about quality, not price : Internet Business

Damn it man! Every sheppard or farmer play SEO our days. And I am just damn sick of that.

[Milo]

Originally Posted by Chuckmiser

I am waiting for the $99.95 program that stops and starts your adwords in rhythm with your listings ups and downs.

Is this a Google program or 3rd party program?

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Brother to be honest I do not go hm-mm, since I know that nothing can go wrong with my work.

That was the editorial "you." I already knew your position on "PR sculpting" via "no follow," and I myself have always been sufficiently sceptical to not invest any effort in trying it.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

And to be honest I am very happy reading all those news, since I think the time came of getting rid of scammers pretending to be SEOs:

Don't Hire a Butcher to do a Baker's Job - Search Engine Watch

Cheap SEO: it’s about quality, not price : Internet Business

Damn it man! Every sheppard or farmer play SEO our days. And I am just damn sick of that.

It's a universal problem, at least as old as recorded history.

If it involves a skill that cannot be objectively quantified, one from which the claim to its possession holds out the promise of easy riches, charlatans are sure to congregate. For example, the number of "SEO Experts" pales in comparison to the number of "IT Consultants."

As for "SEO," it's a name that I avoid, for lack of any universally accepted definition. Other than my own, I have yet to see one that does not ultimately rely on tautology. Mine is as follows:

1) An SEO - A publicist for a web site.
2) The process of SEO - Collectively, the methods employed by an SEO.

There are, of course, those who would take great exception to the above, arguing that "SEO" is in fact "highly specialized." To them I would reply that "A specialist is one who knows nearly everything about almost nothing."

[alienpest]

Last year, I made a comment on one of these threads to the effect that perhaps Google needed to have rotating positions. I said this with tongue in cheek. Do you suppose this could be happening?

[Milo]

My main concern with this "fluctuation" is that why does it not affect all websites. For my keyword, I see at least 3 websites that do not change at all, the rest are all over the place. So if this is an algo change, then its not very fair across the board.

[inertia]

I've been recording the level of competition and SERPs of 3 of my main keywords for several days. Both SERPs and competing pages are up and down randomly. I can see no connection between SERPs and returned pages!

Who knows???!

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by inertia

I've been recording the level of competition and SERPs of 3 of my main keywords for several days. Both SERPs and competing pages are up and down randomly. I can see no connection between SERPs and returned pages!

Who knows???!

I am sure if I understood what you mean. If I did, then have a look here:
Irishwonder’s Black Hat SEO Blog » Google Crawling Speed and Search Query Popularity

[inertia]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I am sure if I understood what you mean. If I did, then have a look here:
Irishwonder’s Black Hat SEO Blog » Google Crawling Speed and Search Query Popularity

At first, i thought the SERPs for my keywords were being effected by the number of returned pages (the more returned pages the lower my SERP because i was competing against more pages - an obvious conclusion). I had a suspicion that the fluctuating SERPs that people were seeing were due to Google "playing" with video and image results mixed in with the SERPs.

After recording positions and the number of returned pages for a few days i have decided I'm wrong! My SERP has nothing to do with the amount of returned pages?

[inertia]

Interesting article webnauts!
Im a little unclear on what he did with the all those nofollows tho!

Anatomy of a Google Filter/Penalty (or how not to do nofollow PR sculpting) | SEO Scientist - Applying the scientific method to SEO

[Peter (IMC)]

I just remember reading in a previous thread that Google has done some work on the PR algorithms. From:

Official Google Blog: Introduction to Google Search Quality

for example, we made significant changes to the PageRank algorithm in January. Most of the time we look for improvements in relevancy, but we also work on projects where the sole purpose is to simplify the algorithms. Simple is good.

If they simplified the PR algorithm, the result (and goal) should be that PR gets updated much faster. That means that the value of a new link is added much faster and the value of a link that is no longer there, is taken out much faster. That has a similar effect like the old Google Dance with the difference that it is now non-stop slow dancing.

[alienpest]

I think Peter may be on to something. That would explain a lot. I think there may also be another side to this. I think that it may not be talked about much, because everyone is still thinking in the same old way, including me. What if, links have become less important, only marginally mind you, but at least a little. I have seen some sites, one or two of my own, with 0 pr, only a handful of moderately important links, and # 1 to 10 placement for important key words and phrases in that industry. This has been happening a little for quite some time, but seems to be escalating these days. What if Google had an updated set of algorithms that took more account of something like the size of a page, or it's relative importance, as far as robot semantics are able to determine? That would change a lot of things!

I am seeing pages indexed much more quickly, important content ranked more quickly, and much of this without the aid of large quantities of links. Of course, this is all just my humble opinion.

[Peter (IMC)]

Actually, I think links are as important as ever, maybe even more. Keep in mind that links change much more than content. Less focus on links would stagnate the SERPs in stead of making them more fluctuating. It'a always been Google's goal to get the most recent state of the web indexed.

In the past you would search the internet of a couple of months ago. Now with the ever flux we´re searching a more recent version of the internet. Actually it's not really a static version of a certain date anymore. The index is never updated in its entirety. It's constantly updated,... like a road that is being maintained, starting at the beginning, and over a certain time frame they have done all repair work on the whole road. Then they start at the beginning again. The road is never in a completely repaired state. But it is a great road because it's constantly being maintained.

The faster they can update the index, and that includes not just the pages them selves, but also all the link info, historical info, PR, etc. then the SERP's will become more fluid. Slow updating means that only very long waves are noticed. Anything that changes faster than the updating frequency basically is filtered out. Anything that changes slower than the updating frequency is visible. Faster updating means that we now see the faster changes as well. It's kind of interesting and cool because now you can see the results of your SEO work much faster,... and for the algohunters that means: Less waiting and more fun in figuring out the algos.

[caravan]

Originally the idea that Google was rotating the search results in order to give a continuous supply of fresh results for any one search made sense to me. After reading this thread I'm not sure anymore. There are several good points raised and a lot of if's and maybe's. I think it's important to remain positive as it should all become clear in time. Until then I'll try to enjoy the ride.

[ThomasSchulzMS]

Originally Posted by Concept Interest

Exactly the same picture in small Denmark - constant fluxing 4-5 positions on year old positions. And actually changing minut by minut. Some times I even see changes 2-3 positions in the very same browser session - just by hitting "Enter" again. I've seen this before but never this much, this long and this heavy.

Sure you are not hitting different data centers? At least if your queries are English and not danske

[alienpest]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Actually, I think links are as important as ever, maybe even more. Keep in mind that links change much more than content. Less focus on links would stagnate the SERPs in stead of making them more fluctuating. It'a always been Google's goal to get the most recent state of the web indexed.

In the past you would search the internet of a couple of months ago. Now with the ever flux we´re searching a more recent version of the internet. Actually it's not really a static version of a certain date anymore. The index is never updated in its entirety. It's constantly updated,... like a road that is being maintained, starting at the beginning, and over a certain time frame they have done all repair work on the whole road. Then they start at the beginning again. The road is never in a completely repaired state. But it is a great road because it's constantly being maintained.

The faster they can update the index, and that includes not just the pages them selves, but also all the link info, historical info, PR, etc. then the SERP's will become more fluid. Slow updating means that only very long waves are noticed. Anything that changes faster than the updating frequency basically is filtered out. Anything that changes slower than the updating frequency is visible. Faster updating means that we now see the faster changes as well. It's kind of interesting and cool because now you can see the results of your SEO work much faster,... and for the algohunters that means: Less waiting and more fun in figuring out the algos.

I agree with you on most of what you are saying, and the fluctuating results have not had any bad effect on any of my sites, but that still does not explain why sites with a lot of pretty good links, are ranking bellow a lot of sites with few to none. In my searching, I am finding that somehow Google is serving up a lot of better content, even with fewer links, before it shows the other well linked sites with less important content. I am not complaining, it has really helped!

One of my sites has bounced back and forth between #1 and #2 for some of the main keywords, with another site from the UK on the other end of the see saw, and a lot of heavily linked sites bellow us. When my site first got into this position, it had perhaps, 2 links.