More Proof that Google PR Is Worthless (and they seem to be doing it on purpose)

**BamaStangGuy** · 07-28-2006, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stefanjuhl

I can only say you're right about Google and that they should show all the links, but they never really did... So nothing to do about that. And I also noticed that you have plenty of really good links...

Another reason for your main page to have such a low pagerank is that you - in a PR matter - has way too many links on each of you thousands of subpages. They are the ones that should "send" the PR back to your main page. But this is only in a matter of PR - your main concern should be traffic from Google and how you feel about your rankings.

Unfortunatly the netscape.com links isn't permanent enough to give you visible pagerank... Unless you could get articles on the frontpage each day ;-)

I have gotten right at 11 articles on the mainpage of netscape in the month of July.

I'm still not convienced that a 3 year old site with 100,000+ back links in Yahoo deserves a PR3 when someone with 1,000 backlinks in yahoo and 5 in Google gets a PR6 after being up for only 2 months heh. Just not going to fly by me.

**stefanjuhl** · 07-28-2006, 04:59 PM

I should maybe also say that the Yahoo functions has their flaws too. They're just the opposite of Google. Since Yahoo shows almost all links they've ever found - and they show them even though they no longer exists!

**stefanjuhl** · 07-28-2006, 05:02 PM

It is your internal links doing the most of the "damage"... But it's not real damage since it doesn't hurt your traffic... normally one would say never to have more than 100 links on one page, which you have on lots of your pages. Pagerank counts both ways if you're considering your website as a pyramid / tree structure. First from the top and down, and then back up again!

**stefanjuhl** · 07-28-2006, 05:03 PM

It's all mathematics and formulas... Rules are rules nothing to do about that! Pagerank is overrated and all that counts is your rankings and your ability to catch the long tail, which I bet your making good traffic from!

**ltn1dr** · 07-28-2006, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BamaStangGuy

Google PR is the biggest load of crap ever. Their latest PR updates are totally worthless. It is almost like they find humor in pissing off the entire webmaster community.

Let's take an existing PR5 site and get the number of links shown in Google (and yahoo for giggles to get a more accurate account)

Existing PR5 site (for the last 18 months this site has not went up or down from PR5.)

http://www.sportsoutlaw.com
Site created: March 2004
Domain Registered Until: Feb 2007
Google Links: Results 1 - 10 of about 259 linking to http://www.sportsoutlaw.com/
Yahoo Links: 1 - 10 of about 7,460 for link:http://www.sportsoutlaw.com

259 links (showing in Google) and he has a PR5 site. Alrighty lets try a PR3 site that has been PR 3 for atleast the last two major PR Updates.

http://www.mustangevolution.com
Site Created: May 2003
Domain Registered Until: July 2015
Google Links: Results 1 - 10 of about 227 linking to http://www.mustangevolution.com/
Yahoo Links: 1 - 10 of about 105,000 for link:http://www.mustangevolution.com

hmmmm.... 227 links in google = PR3
Also notice the huge difference in links between Mustangevolution and Sportsoutlaw in Yahoo. *scratches chin*

Alrighty now you ready for the real kicker?

Let's take a site that just recieved a PR6 site with the last update. So we got this new PR6 site (as of last PR update). Anyone care to take a guess when this site was created?

Anyone?

June 2006.

That's right folks. It got it's lovely PR6 in 2 months. Well maybe its a popular site with tons of backlinks Bama? I wish that was the case... but sadly its not.

Now I am not knocking this site at all. Its an awesome site with a great design. I am only using this one as an example because it blew me out of the water when I saw it was a PR6 site. Just using this to prove my point with Google.

http://www.nerdpoint.com
Site Created: June 2006
Domain Registered Until: May 2007
Results 1 - 4 of about 5 linking to http://www.nerdpoint.com.
1 - 10 of about 1,360 for link:http://www.nerdpoint.com

So you tell me. Does that add up?

Now before you tell me that I shouldnt be concerned about PR be very aware that I do not believe PR = higher rankings. What my problem with is the fact that Google is the number 1 search engine in the world and they are acting like a start up company. Their search engine is a mess, huge sites have gone mostly supplemental, and the issue Pagerank updates with little to no care at all how accurate they are at all. It's like PR is now just thrown together and issued to get more press. It seems they are only using PR to get publicity now. They just simply dont care enough to put any effort into making it look remotely realistic.

Well I look forward to seeing what you think of all this.

Holy crap you get backlinks realllyy fast.

**aaanativearts** · 07-30-2006, 10:43 AM

People tend to lose sight of the fact that PR is only a small part of where your site will rank. There are something like 140 factors that are figured into where your page will rank. Page optimization is far more important, IMO. If you have your keywords in your title and description and the right keyword density and placement on the page, you'll almost always outrank a site that doesn't. I've had pages with PR 0 outrank pages with PR 5 for extended periods.

I think only when all other factors are equal, then Page Rank kicks in.

Having a link from an authority site, with a PR of 6 or above, or one that is listed in DMOZ is worth more than a whole pile of links from lower ranking sites in terms of Page Rank scores.

Links with anchor text that support the keywords of the page they are linking to counts for more. If all the anchor text pointing to a page is the same phrase, however, that triggers a penalty and it counts for less. One way links count for more than two-way links. If there are about 15 or less links on a page, including internal navigation, those links pass a great deal of their PR. If a page has 100+ links, the amount of PR passed to any one link is almost unmeasurable. If the linking site mixes your link with links to other sites that aren't the same theme as yours, they don't help you. If you link to your own sites on pages you own that aren't related to the one you're linking to, that can drop your position in the search engines by 5-10 pages. If a link comes from the same C block of IP's, it doesn't help you much. There are just so many variables that affect page rank besides the number of incoming links.

**BamaStangGuy** · 07-30-2006, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaanativearts

People tend to lose sight of the fact that PR is only a small part of where your site will rank.

I have already stated that this is not the reason I am upset with the Google PR updates.

I tried my best to make that clear because I knew someone was going to come in and tell me how Google works. I know how they work. My whole point was that PR is now not distributive correctly at all. Period. Whether it helps you in rankings or not a 2 month old site with barely any links does not deserve a PR6. It does however matter to people who sell links on their site like me.

**aaanativearts** · 07-30-2006, 02:22 PM

I will sometimes have a higher PR on an internal page, but not all of them. I think this is because my index page functions more as an index and links to a lot of sub-niches that may not interest everyone, and it carries blurbs for the 10 latest articles, regardless of which of the many sub-niches on my site they came from so the index page is more general. Persons linking to me may prefer a section or catagory page because it is more relevant for their audience and whatever their niche may be or they were just interested in a particular article.

**peterk** · 07-30-2006, 02:57 PM

I agree that PR is messed up, usually I get better PR than I should, so I'm not complaining (though my new sites arn't doing that well on the PR front). Msn and the likes have a better system in my opinion

**BamaStangGuy** · 07-30-2006, 02:57 PM

Not to mention that that two month old site shares the same PR as this site: http://www.howardforums.com/

Not even close to accutate

**GeorgeB** · 08-07-2006, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stefanjuhl

BamaStangGuy, you really can't compare links from different PR7 sites.

The first and simplest reason is that the probably don't have the same number of outgoing links.

The second and more important reason, is that, as I wrote earlier, the 1 to 10 scale is made through a logarithmic function. E.g.

1 - 9 points = PR1
10 - 99 points = PR2
100 - 999 points = PR3
1000 - 9999 points = PR4
10000 - 99999 points = PR5
100000 - 999999 points = PR6
1000000 - 9999999 points = PR7
10000000 - 99999999 points = PR8
....

Note, it's just a simple example. But you should get the point that the actual link popularity measurement of a site is far more than just a 1 to 10 scale. As you can see in the example, there can be an almost 10 fold difference on a Pr7...

Regarding your mainpage having less PR than your subforums - do you link from ALL subpages to your mainpage? You should consider your internal linking ...

Where did you pull all that information from? Was it rectal?

If not then how are things at the Googleplex where you work?