Subscribe in a reader
HOME
Over optimization or weighting algorithms?
Not long ago when Google was young and spammers had their way with it’s algorithm you could optimize a site with the most basic SEO to get it to rank well. As is today with the nofollow tag Google has no way of dealing with certain types of spam so they introduce temporary fixes while developing stronger weighting algorithms.
It was believed that over optimization of a site would lead to penalties caused by imaginary filters but it appears this was just typical SEO paranoia. Google uses the hands off method of allowing you to screw up your rankings because everything you do has weight. Weighting algorithms exists to level the playing field and even though they are still far from perfect, there are lots of positive signs. Ever wonder how that “mom and pop” site keeps outranking yours year after year?
In 2004 GoogleGuy (Matt Cutts) tried to clue SEOs into the weighting algorithm idea (link):
Question: “Has Google applied some sort of OOP or filter to the algorithm since the Florida update or was the drastic change in SERPs purely the result of new ranking criteria?”
It’s the second one. People post around here about filters, blocking, penalties, etc. etc. A far better explanation is “things which used to work before don’t receive the same amount of credit now.” It’s natural for people who are way out there with their linking strategies or their page-building strategies to think of a drop as an over-optimization penalty, but it’s more realistic to conclude that Google is weighting criteria differently so that over-optimized sites just aren’t doing as well now.
I am pretty sure what was true back then is true today when it comes to over optimization.
- There are no filters.
- There are no penalties.
- There is weighting algorithms.
It may seem that your site bouncing around in the 950 range is being penalized or filtered but it is more likely that it does not meet the correct criteria for your niche. Improve the quality for humans, let natural links develop and watch the magic happen.
I like to think that good SEO removes weight so a site with clean crawlable code, useful content and human interest floats like a ship while a website that abuses algorithmic law (cool phrase eh?) sinks. I like to think in any way I choose without regard to what others believe is true.
Care to prove me wrong?
I will be posting things off the top of my head in the next couple weeks, if I bother you tell me why or just go away.
Thank you JLH @ Google Groups for encouraging me to dig further, it looks like misspellings are fine, they just might not get the same results because of weight.
A little more on weighting:
Weighting PageRank Algorithm - (notice how analyzing patterns of behavior are also factored in, ever wonder what Google does with all the data they collect from all their free stuff?)
I can imagine how penalization, filtering and weighting can mean the same thing to the untrained eye but learning the difference will set you free from your frustration.
Similar Post:
- Earned Organic Links
- Social algorithms are coming
- How will social optimization change the SEO industry?
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:31 pm
I think you’re right. There’s a difference between over optimization and black hat techniques. For example, a high keyword density might be perceived as spammy and not get a top ten result - but it won’t necessarily get you banned like cloaking or something else. (Still learning this stuff, so bear with my comments)
April 2nd, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Nathiana - That is correct, their is not any penalty for over optimization.
April 3rd, 2007 at 7:14 am
I tend to agree with that, Aaron. There are people who “over-optimize” because they don’t know any better and people who spam because they do. The difference between the two, as you said, is that spammers tend to use more advanced techniques such as cloaking, multiple domains/sites, faux domain registrations, etc.
April 4th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
It still hasn’t been publicly shown that Matt is GoogleGuy. Last time I checked, he had debunked the SearchEngineWatch “outing”.
April 9th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
One person’s SPAM is another person’s SEO optimized site. Who is to say what is SPAM? And, what is genuine SEO?
As long as the penalties are assigned by Google on a page by page basis, I can deal with it. But, those Global -950 penalties are another matter.
April 10th, 2007 at 7:16 am
I’d seriously like to meet the person who started that -950 theory and smack him/her upside the head.