McDar Experiment

Is there a difference between a link passing Pr over and a link improving serps ?

Maybe if it's over 50 you get no Serps points but you still get a share of the PR ?

Unless there is some horrific delay in links being accounted for in SERPs I see no other reason .....

 

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/12/2004
194 - 5/13/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

 

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/12/2004
194 - 5/13/2004
195 - 5/14/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/13/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

 

I find it very curious how Digital Point and SEO Chat forums seem to get spidered so differently!

 

Digital Point certainly is an aggressively spidered forum.

I'm also a member of the Internet Marketing Research forum. You might call it the home of the "links are king" school of thought. Their threads don't get spidered near as thoroughly as the information from this forum does. Or if they get spidered they don't show up in the backlink searches like the link from this forum.

Maybe it is the vBulletin software. Almost all the other forums are using phpBB. There was a lot of talk after Florida that Google was devaluing forum links. If there is any truth in that maybe they did it by devaluing links from phpBB sources.

In any case the members of this forum are getting a real bonus from the way that Google treats the links from here.

 

Bob,

Both, Digital Point and SEO Chat are vBulletin forums!

 

First of all, let me just say that this must be one of the most interesting threads I've read (I found the thread by following a link posted by Bob Wakfer at IMR, by the way).

I saw that the sandbox theory came up in the discussion, and in relation to this, I have a question if that's okay. The theory has been that new domains are put in a sandbox, or some kind of quarentine, before they start ranking for their keywords.

At IMR today I read a post by John Scott where he said that new links were diluted, and would only gain effect after a certain time (his Bluefind Web Directory had triggered this filter by amassing a large number of links in a very short time from the same network, internet.com). I don't know if this is in addition to the sandbox theory, or a new theory.

Anyway, he gave two links to two different SERPS. One of a SERP with the filter (i.e. a normal search), and one without the filter (made possible by adding -ksjfdljflsjkdfj a large number of time after the search term). In a normal search the bluefind directory would be 200+ somewhere, but when searching with the -adjflsjdfksjfh (which word you use doesn't matter as long as it doesn't exist and is repeated a large number of times) bluefind showed up at #13.

I tried to do the same when searching for sleeping bags, and your site showed up as #4, Caryl. If John is right, this means that you currently have enough links to justify a #4 position, but that some of the effect of these links are held back because the links are relatively new. Do any of you involved in this very interesting experiment have any thoughts on this?

 

Rational,

I've seen this thread at IMR (can't seem to find it now to review exactly what was said), but I think the idea was that the LINK itself is sandbox'ed, not neccessarily the page that it points to, even is that page itself is new. I think that is what you are saying, and may actually be a reason that the PR7 sleeping bags backlink from www.komar.org didn't seem to show up (?)

Another good example I can think of is the team powder2glass Google Compute page which currently shows up on the 4th page if you do a Normal Google Search. However, it shows up on the 1st page if you do a "sandbox'ed" Google Search.

So while Google obviously "knows" about the page (and hasn't completely kicked it out of the normal SERP's), the links are less than 2 months old, so probably just now starting to kick in.

It may be that if the anchor text matches keywords for which the page is optimized for, Google sandboxes/devalues that link for some period of time, although that doesn't always seem consistant. Additional tweeks may be applied in the algorithm depending on the total number of links (from a specific domain and/or also everyone) to try to detect Google bombing ... although argueably a lotta keyword specific votes to a certain page does imply it is an authority in that area, although I can see a dampening factor applied.

Regardless, if I worked at Google, the whole N-U contest would be quite interesting to me and I'd be looking closely at the internals of the search algorithms to see how to improve and/or make sure it doesn't break - heck, what happens if a site has a MILLION links!

alek

 

SEOChat, SEO-GUY, and DP all use the same excellent software. It spiders out of the box unlike most other forums because of the built in archive and holds its PR better.

 

Hello Rational,
Welcome to the Digital Point Forum!

Thanks for that information. I had not seen that "filter remover" before and it has certainly shown a new light on the sandbox theory pertaining to new links instead of just new websites!

What I find curious is that it does NOT seem to apply to ALL new links, as the experiment page has made great progress that could not have been accomplished without the "new" links (since all are new). But, perhaps, high PR links are diminished by this filter...

I still have to ponder this one

Caryl

 

Yes, this is how I interpreted John's theory as well. I am, however, as puzzeled as you are regarding why your PR7 link didn't show up. If we follow John's theory on the links' reduced power, it should still show up as a backlink (only with reduced power/effect). I don't think this particular page has been blocked from passing PR either... since other sites show it among their backlinks. Maybe it simply is a glitch in the way Google shows the backlinks?

It will definitely be very interesting to see what happens when you pull the link (if everything else remains stable and no other links are acquired during that period).

Here is what John said in relation to "links on probation" theory:

...and here is a link to the thread on IMR:
http://www.internet-marketing-research.net/forums/ftopic7379-0-asc-40.html

I think this theory makes a lot of sense. If Google reduces the power of new links for a period, they will make the SERPs more stable (generally) and still be able to catch big movements on the internet. New sites with interest for the general public will still rise to the top, it will just take much more to move quickly up.

From a SEO perspective, it will be a question of whether it is beneficial to power one's way to the top, or be more patient.

I am also experiencing this with a new site of mine. I put it up in the beginning of March, and acquired all my links during a period of 2-3 weeks. Google indexed the entire site very quickly, and I could find the site seaching for different phrases in the text... but I was nowhere to be found for my targeted search term (which is used as anchor text on close to 100% of the IBLs). All the pages linking to me were spidered very quickly as well, so Google knew about the links.

I haven't touched the site since then, and have not acquired any new links either. And now... suddenly, my site has started to rise quickly towards the top of the SERP. To my great delight, of course

It is difficult to say for sure why this is happening, but the way this has happened make me lean towards John's theory.

Maybe it is possible to say that conducting an unfiltered or sandboxed search, shows the current potential of a site (all inclusive, title, IBLs etc.), and that if nothing had changed the SERP of a normal search would move toward this state. In the real world links are lost, gained and sites re-written so it is impossible to say that this is how the SERP will look in the future... if the theory is right and this do show the current potential of a site, it sure gives a lot of new and interesting information though ...this is, however, all speculation and theories from my end... and that's why this experiment is so interesting. More knowledge!

 

NEW PAGE UPDATE:
*Google PR/Backlink update

The "New Page" sleeping-bags.htm
04/07/2004 "New Page" went live

Search for "Sleeping Bags"
Position#n/a allinanchor:#n/a - 04/08/2004
position#104 allinanchor#32 - 04/09/2004
Postion#232 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/11/2004
Postion#193 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/12/2004
Postion#136 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/13/2004
Postion#133 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/14/2004
Postion#108 allinanchor:#n/a - 04/15/2004
Postion#104 allinanchor:#30 - 04/16/2004
Postion#92 allinanchor:#32 - 04/17/2004
Postion#29 allinanchor:#13 - 04/18/2004 [11 datacenters #30, 4 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#28 allinanchor:#13 - 04/19/2004 [ 5 datacenters #27, 2 datacenters #22]
Postion#29 allinanchor:#15 - 04/20/2004 [16 datacenters #25, 6 datacenters #27]
Postion#25 allinanchor:#7 - 04/21/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion#18 allinanchor: #7 - 04/22/2004 [10 datacenters #19]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/23/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7 - 04/24/2004 [7 datacenters #21]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/25/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #17 allinanchor: #6 - 04/26/2004 [7 datacenters #20]
Postion #19 allinanchor: #7- 04/27/2004 [18 datacenters #16]
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 04/28/2004 [All datacenters] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 5 DCs & #9 on 7 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/29/2004 [9 datacenters #23] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 16 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #7 - 04/30/2004 [7 datacenters #23, 13 datacenters #24] Note: Allinanchor #8 on 14 DCs
Postion #16 allinanchor: #7 - 05/01/2004 [10 datacenters #17] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/02/2004 [13 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #21 allinanchor: #8 - 05/03/2004 [20 datacenters #22]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/04/2004 [All datacenters]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 15 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/05/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/06/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/07/2004 [All datacenters]
Postion #18 allinanchor: #7 - 05/08/2004 [2 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/09/2004 [2 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 2 DCs
Postion #18 allinanchor: #8 - 05/10/2004 [5 datacenters #16]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 4 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/11/2004 [13 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 13 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #7 - 05/12/2004 [21 datacenters #15]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 20 DCs
Postion #17 allinanchor: #5 - 05/13/2004 [24 datacenters #14]Note: Allinanchor #6 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #6 - 05/14/2004 [28 datacenters #19]Note: Allinanchor #7 on 28 DCs
Postion #15 allinanchor: #5 - 05/15/2004 [12 datacenters #19] Note: Allinanchor #6 on 12 DCs


_____________________________________________________
note: these pages are found using ( site:www.compar.com +sleeping Bags )
number of Bob's PR6 and PR5 links found:
19 - 4/13/2004
24 - 4/14/2004
40 - 4/15/2004 (most datacenters report 40 but some as low as 31)
37 - 4/16/2004 (7 datacenters report 36, 7 report 42, the rest - 37)
37 - 4/17/2004 (8 datacenters report 36, the rest - 37)
38 - 4/18/2004 (10 datacenters report 37, 16 report 32, the rest - 37)
48 - 4/19/2004 (7 datacenters report 47, the rest - 48)
50 - 4/20/2004 (9 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
50 - 4/21/2004 (7 datacenters report 49, the rest - 50)
51 - 4/22/2004 (12 datacenters report 48, 5 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/23/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/24/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/25/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
51 - 4/26/2004 (7 datacenters report 50, the rest - 51)
50 - 4/27/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/28/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/29/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 4/30/2004 (All datacenters )
50 - 5/01/2004 (All datacenters )
52 - 5/02/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/03/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/04/2004 (All datacenters )
55 - 5/05/2004 (All datacenters )
54 - 5/06/2004 (All datacenters )
Unchanged from previous date
54 - 5/10/2004 (17 datacenters report 55)
55 - 5/11/2004 (All datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.komar.org +sleeping Bags )
Alek's PR 7 Link:
Not reported by Google 4/17/2004
Reported by Google 4/18/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/19/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/20/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/21/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/22/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/23/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/24/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/25/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/26/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/27/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/28/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/29/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 4/30/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/01/2004 (all datacenters) *page changed link now #37 on page
Reported by Google 5/02/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/03/2004 (all datacenters)
Reported by Google 5/04/2004 (all datacenters)
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
note: this page is found using ( site:www.ski-france-ok.com +sleeping Bags )
Foxy's PR5 and two PR4s
0 - 4/20/2004
1 - 4/21/2004
1 - 4/22/2004
1 - 4/23/2004
1 - 4/24/2004
1 - 4/25/2004
1 - 4/26/2004
2 - 4/27/2004
2 - 4/28/2004
2 - 4/29/2004
2 - 4/30/2004
2 - 5/01/2004
3 - 5/02/2004
3 - 5/03/2004
3 - 5/04/2004
Unchanged from previous date
__________________
# of Links from my posts to this thead
69 4/17/2004 [Edited to remove 20 posts in this thread that did not have link]
75 - 4/18/2004
90 - 4/19/2004
93 - 4/20/2004
97 - 4/21/2004
104 - 4/22/2004
111 - 4/23/2004
117 - 4/24/2004
121 - 4/25/2004
127 - 4/26/2004
129 - 4/27/2004
132 - 4/28/2004
133 - 4/29/2004
137 - 4/30/2004
152 - 5/01/2004
154 - 5/02/2004
158 - 5/03/2004
161 - 5/04/2004
163 - 5/05/2004
173 - 5/06/2004
178 - 5/07/2004
179 - 5/08/2004
180 - 5/09/2004
184 - 5/10/2004
185 - 5/11/2004
189 - 5/12/2004
194 - 5/13/2004
195 - 5/14/2004
198 - 5/15/2004
__________________
Bob and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on this forum 5/06/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.digitalpoint.com +sleeping bags )
217 - 5/06/2004
241 - 5/07/2004
246 - 5/08/2004
901 - 5/09/2004 ( Looks like the sig links were picked up )
908 - 5/10/2004 ( 18 Datacenters report 1660)
1670 - 5/11/2004
1990 - 5/12/2004
2290 - 5/13/2004
2670 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 2960)
2950 - 5/15/2004
__________________

Caryl and Foxy added link Sleeping Bags to their sig files on the SEO Chat forum 5/11/2004
Results for - ( site:forums.seochat.com +sleeping bags )
9 - 5/11/2004
10 - 5/12/2004
13 - 5/13/2004
16 - 5/14/2004 ( 4 Datacenters report 110)
108 - 5/15/2004
__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004

__________________

Caryl's Links [links posted 04/07/2004]
2 PR6s & 5 PR5's
__________________
PR/Backlink info

sleeping-bags.htm has PR5
49 Backlinks
(backlinks reported in the 49)
5 of Caryl's links
42 of Bob's Links
1 of Foxy's Links
2 for Digitalpoint forums
Nothing for Alek's PR7 link(the link on Alek's page is 53rd link - may validate the 50 link/page theory)
__________________

 

Hi Caryl and thanks for the welcome!

I didn't see your post while writing the other one (was doing a lot of other things at the same time).

Yes, I will be very interested in hearing your thoughts on this one when you've had time to think some more about it.

Can it be that the filter is applied on these new links, but that the sheer volume and the fact that they are as targeted as they are, still makes your site show up at #15? And... if all the links had had their full effect, you would have been at #4 already? I don't know.

 

...I just thought of something... there might be a way of testing John's theory without reducing the value of the current experiment. This can be done simply by taking a note of the site's position in the unfiltered SERP. And, when your site reaches #1 in this SERP, simply ensure that it stays there (i.e. add some links if someone else does any optimization that pushes you down).

Then, as time passes, the position in the unfiltered and filtered SERP should start to converge for your site.

The SERPs themselves will never converge, due to natural fluctuation in links and optimization, but the positions for one site can in theory.

 

Rational,

At your suggestion, I have just added the following to today's Update and will continue to monitor this as well.

__________________

"Sandbox" info - this search theoretically removes "sandbox" link filter
Results for - ( sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -das -das -dsa )
#3 - 05/15/2004

__________________

This is a fine contribution to the experiment and may go a long way in explaining the "glass ceiling" we have seemed to have hit. Time will tell...

Thanks!
Caryl

 

I read John's original post about the sandbox theory and the filtered search. I will admit that I was sketical. BTW a filter like that use right after Florida seemed to give you the pre Florida results, which would had nothing to do with the "newness" of links.

However, I intended to test John's search but have been too busy with a bunch of other things. Due to Rational's input I finally got around to testing it on a variety of pages I'm working with and it certainly seems like the theory is has some validity.

Caryl, could you offer this search as an option with your Keyword Analysis Tool?

I just added it to a search using your tool for a very new site I'm working on. The site does not currently show up in the top 200 spots, but with the filter it is #7. (see the attach copy of the results page) Also look at the allinanchor numbers. This search has ranked the sites in exact allinanchor order.

 

Bob,
I will look into adding that search to the Keyword Analysis Tool this coming week, when I get some time.

Caryl

 

I Just did a search for sleeping bags -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa -dsa on the Datacenter Watch Tool (link in sig below) and selected the Allin: search.

The top 10 were EXACTLY the same results for...

Regular results, Allintext results, and Allinanchor results!

The only place they differed was in Allinurl.

This is indeed curious

Caryl

 

By the way...

I probably will NOT be able to post an Update tomorrow as I will be out of town until tomorrow evening.

Caryl

 

wow this is a long thread.

Anyway, I've used your tool a time or two mcdar, seems to be a good tool.

PR would be nice as Bob suggested, why not talk to these guys and possibly partner in some way or see if they will let you pull page rank from them: http://www.webmasterbrain.com/proogle/

Also it would be nice as I think has been suggested(i am not reading all 41 pages) to maybe analyze the difference among search engines. which is something I thought digital point did at one time, but I can't find the tool anywhere.