Google Jagger Algo Update

Jagger history

The Jagger 1 update pre-shocks actually started with a string of back-link updates that began in September 2005 and continued into middle of October 2005.

In mid October, Google updated its PageRank database for public view. Usually updated once a quarter, the PR update always creates a stir.

While most SEO professionals heavily play-down the importance of PR in ranking, the legacy of its importance is so deep-rooted in the minds of most webmasters, that it is difficult to shake it off as an insignificant ranking parameter.

[PageRank is Google's measure of the "popularity" of a web page, based on the number and quality of incoming links. The Editor.]

It is believed that the second phase of the Jagger update — Jagger 2 — is now complete and replicated to all the data centers of Google. However, you may still notice some fluctuations in the rankings as things stabilize for each update.

We are now at the threshold of the third phase of the Jagger update, which is expected to initiate sometime in the second week of November 2005.
The changes

From what we have studied so far, Google has re-engineered several aspects of its algorithm. Amongst other aspects we will know as things roll out, we believe it has altered the impact of the following:

1. Value of incoming links
2. Value of anchor text in incoming links
3. Content on page of incoming links
4. Keyword repetitions in anchor text
5. Age of the incoming links
6. Nature of sites linking to you
7. Directory links
8. Speed and volume of incoming links created
9. Value of reciprocal links
10. Impact of outbound links / links page on your website
11. Sandbox effect / age of your site, domain registration date
12. Size of your site’s content
13. Addition and frequency of fresh content update
14. Canonical / sub domains, sub-sub domains
15. Multiple domains on same IP numbers
16. Duplicate content on same site or on multiple domains
17. Over-optimization, excessive text markup
18. Irrational use of CSS

We are studying various aspects of the Jagger algo update and are closely monitoring the impact of changes in each of the above mentioned parameters and many more not mentioned here.

We shall be discussing the impact of each of these aspects in the next parts of this article, which are likely to be written once the Jagger 3 update and our study of it is complete.

In the meanwhile, we’d like to give out a word of caution – If you have suffered drop in your website rankings, do not do any drastic changes on your website until the Jagger 3 update is fully implemented and stabilized.

There is a delicate balance and inter-dependence of all these parameters that can bring back your ranks once the Jagger 3 update is completed.

Read More: http://www.pandia.com/sew/112-on-the-google-jagger-algo-update-part-1.html

SEO - URL Canonicalization Problem

We often come across websites that are accessible by both the www and the non-www version of its URL. While apparently both the URLs look the same, the search engines can treat them as separate sites altogether. This is something known as a canonical issue.

"Canonicalization is the process of picking the best url when there are several choices, and it usually refers to home pages."

Matt further adds:

"For example, most people would consider these the same urls:

* www.example.com

* example.com/

* www.example.com/index.html

* example.com/home.asp

But technically all of these urls are different. A web server could return completely different content for all the urls above. When Google “canonicalizes” a url, we try to pick the url that seems like the best representative from that set.”

Since the search engines treat the www and the non-www version of the same URL to be different websites, there’s a risk of duplicate content issues arising because of the same content served on both the URLs.


Read More: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/canonicalization-seo-should-i-use-www-or-not/6950/

Google Update 2010 - Mayday” Update Impacts Long Tail Traffic

Google made between 350 and 550 changes in its organic search algorithms in 2009. This is one of the reasons I recommend that site owners not get too fixated on specific ranking factors. If you tie construction of your site to any one perceived algorithm signal, you’re at the mercy of Google’s constant tweaks. These frequent changes are one reason Google itself downplays algorithm updates. Focus on what Google is trying to accomplish as it refines things (the most relevant, useful results possible for searchers) and you’ll generally avoid too much turbulence in your organic search traffic.