interesting.. Google Number one with no Keywords.. how?

[kevsta]

Hi all.

Ok, so i have a relatively new site, have optimised it by the book, gone for human content over keyword stuffing & dodgy tricks etc.

although listed, my site is nowhere to be seen in the relevant keyword searches,(sandboxed i suppose?)

so anyway, this morning im analysing the top ten sites on those searches to see what theyre doing better, and the number one site has no meta tags, no keywords and is using an image as their front page, (and on most pages in fact)

there are several other similar sites high in the searches with extremely low keyword densities, no repeats, & generally not optimised at all, but regular top ten search performers.

how does that work??

im also fairly sure its not by large traffic volumes to these sites, as its a fairly niche area we're in.

anyone throw any light on what theyre doing?

can supply details if required? ..suffice to say if you did a google keyword search for "Triathlon Camp" the site in question is top of the page (not including the sponsored link, which is prob my PPC - please dont click it, ;)

[jgarner]

Kevsta,
Perhaps I am not searching the proper keyword(s). when searching for "Triathlon Camp," the first five results pulled pages that all had some meta info and decent content. Not to mention decent link popularity. I am still new at SEO, (only about 2 years in the field professionally) but content is very important. Can you provide the number one spot's URL that you are seeing?

[kevsta]

hi jgarner.

& thx for your response. im hesitant to name names, and may not have been completely accurate with my original description. - the site im talking about could be alternatively descibed as "complete submersion"

google search (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=triathlon+camp&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)

yes, there is a page of text, but my rankquest software is showing none of the usual optimisation methods, no meta keywords, description etc. nor does a quick glance over the "View Source" page.

also google links check shows no links to that page whatsoever, and out of about 20 links in total to their homepage, 5 are from other sites, i.e. not their own site/s?

have they achieved a consistent top spot merely by one page with the phrase 3 or 4 times?

[jgarner]

I sent you a PM to insure that we are looking at the same page. If so, that page has a title (very important) and rich in content. As for the link popularity, as far as I know there are no reporting tools that will result in a competent number as Google themselves will not return an all inclusive list of links. They be sneaky. Check this out and be sure to not put in the homepage as that is not the one listing www.sitereportcard.com. This will show a few links in The G spot and keeping with my last statement, it would be safe to say they have a few more. Im not familiar with the SEO tool that you are using, they are all different, but be sure to input the full URL of the suspect and not the homepage. I hope this helps.

[kevsta]

thanks for the link, it def seems to give better readings for inbound links than the one i'm using.

still shows all inbound links to their site from their shopping site though, and no meta keywords or description?

..the title you mention (taking it you mean meta title?) isnt related to the search either?

keyword densities are

triathlon (15) 1.89%
ti (15) 1.89%
immersion (15) 1.89%
total (15) 1.89%
camp (13) 1.64%

so are we saying that it's ALL down to what you write on the page, & a big long page of text using the word 15 times will do it?

because unless im misunderstanding something here, they dont seem to have any of the other SEO stuff sorted at all?

[weslinda]

One big key that some people don't realize is that the "age" of the domain can play a bit of a role in it's rankings. If it's been around a while, that can help raise it's importance.

Just another factor that isn't being discussed.

[jgarner]

That's a really good point. A lot of tools and guides quote keyword relevancy and density. But there are a lot of other factors like link popularity, the relevancy of those links, the anchor tags of those links, tenure on line, cleanliness of code, proper validation, and much much more. I love SEO and hate it at the same time. If there is someone ranking higher, and you are looking at something that would seem you are doing better, look at something else.

[dburdon]

Kevsta,

your rival's site is ok for text. See Google cache:

www.totalimmersion.co.uk/wkshps-triathlon.html+triathlon+camp&hl=en&lr=&strip=1]Google (http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:jImY1ACjoAsJ:[url) cache[/url]

However, they're weak on leaks. No more than half a dozen.

PM me for a relevant reciprocal.

[freehits]

Registered on: 07-Feb-2000

That is the answer