Jagger winding down

(a quickie post for those SEOs who can’t resist watching data centers)

As Jagger1 and Jagger2 wind down and Jagger3 is visible at 66.102.9.104, I wanted to recap where things stand.

  • Jagger1 was visible at most data centers starting around 10/16/05. A second, refreshed version of Jagger1 was visible recently at 66.102.7.104 and was at all data centers by 11/7/05.
  • Jagger2 was visible starting at 66.102.9.104 starting around 10/27/05. Jagger2 was visible at all data centers by 11/6/05.
  • Jagger3 was visible starting at 66.102.9.104 around 11/4/2005. Jagger3 is not widely visible yet (it might also be at 216.239.51.104), but I expect it migrate to other data centers over time.

Q: Is the update winding down?
A: It’s starting to. Recall that all of Jagger1/2/3 are separate changes. Jagger1 and 2 are done, and you can see what Jagger3 will look like at 66.102.9.104.

Q: Do you still want spam reports if I see things like hidden text, hidden links, etc.?
A: Absolutely. We’re working through the reports that we’ve received, but I’d love to have more. Just to repeat, you can do a spam report at http://www.google.com/contact/spamreport.html with the keyword “jagger3″ and we’ll check it out.

134 Responses to Jagger winding down (Leave a comment)

  1. adam

    so wassup with duplicate content filters? you no longer show which pages are considered as duplicate and which ones are ok?

  2. Stephen

    Matt

    Why have Canonical issues not really been resolved.

    And why has your site disappeared?

    http://66.102.11.104/search?hl=en&lr=&q=www.mattcutts.com&btnG=Search

    http://66.102.11.104/search?hl=en&lr=&q=mattcutts.com&btnG=Search

    Ok, Jagger3 winding down ? Hmmmz – has the 2nd ordering effect been applied ?

  3. Harith

    Good morning Matt

    Thanks for the “comprehensive” Jagger update.

    Have a great day.

  4. Thanks, just now reported a spammer who still seems very much alive and kicking with possibly millions of cloaked pages, 302 hijacks against news websites (apperently, and mine included), no cache to check.

  5. Thanks for the update. When is the next likely update – mini or otherwise with regards to sandboxed sites?

    I know you will be swamped in Vegas but I look forward to meeting you next week if I get a chance to.

  6. Matt, I am slowely but surely realizing that this blog is gold. Keep it coming for all of us.

  7. Matt

    Steve, I don’t know every potential launch that might cause some change, but personally I’ve had enough of update discussion for a while. :) We may have some test data center that looks a little different at some point, but it would only be one IP. Other than that, I’m not aware of any huge pending index changes.

  8. Matt

    BTW, if you see me at Vegas, please come up and say hello and chat. :)

  9. Just to have some peace on my mind…

    Is the result from 66.102.9.104 (Jagger3) will be the final result until the update ends ??

    thanks matt.

  10. Eddie-

    Matt-

    Thanks for keeping us updated over the past few weeks. “but personally I’ve had enough of update discussion for a while” Don’t blame you. Peace from L.A :)

  11. ArturO

    When do we have to expect jagger3 results to be visible at google.de / google.com ect.? Will the Results first spread to ALL DC’s before they are are connected with the google-domains?

  12. Hi Matt,

    My site used to rank well in google (before the June update) after that it has ranked very poorly. I paid an “SEO expert” $2500 to tell me “its in the sandbox you have to just wait”, but the site is about 2 years old. I know you probably get a million of these type of requests, but is there any way you could take a peak and let me know if i’ve been penalized for something or am doing something wrong? I have spent 5 months trying to figure out what was wrong, with no luck. I was hoping this last round of updates would change things. Any help would be soooooo apreciated.

    Thanks,
    Will

  13. Harith

    Hi Matt

    “Steve, I don’t know every potential launch that might cause some change, but personally I’ve had enough of update discussion for a while.”

    That I can understand. No more questions about Jagger from my side :-)

    Maybe you wish to write next time about something more refreshing:

    “The best links are not paid, or exchanged after out-of-the-blue emails–the best links are earned and given by choice. When I recap SES from my viewpoint, I’ll give some examples of great ways to earn links.”

    http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/seo-mistakes-link-exchange-emails/

  14. Matt

    ArturO, I’m not positive, but barring surprises I’m guessing a fair number of data centers would migrate over in the next week. Don’t quote me (like that won’t happen :) ), but that’s my best guess.

  15. Chris Hoffman

    One of my sites it not that bad, but two of my others went from ranking well for some searches to not ranking at all (at least in the top 80 or so). I do not have any spam or anything like that…so I am hoping it will clear up before all it said and done. Wish me luck. :)

  16. michal

    Hi Matt,

    glad to read that you have decided for the cleaner version of the SERPs.
    now I can find something and switch back from yahoo to google!
    cheers,
    michal

  17. Danny

    I’ve reported some sites after jagger1, jagger2 and during jagger3.
    Unfortunately these sites are still there and ranking even higher than before.
    Is it usefull to report them once again or would you consider this as a ‘spam’ spamreport ?
    Btw, it’s about Dutch pages… i hope there’s not given any priority to English pages ?

  18. Dave

    When is Jagger4 ;)

  19. Thanks for getting back to me Matt – will definately try and get to meet you.

  20. Dave

    Hey Matt, here is some positive feedback for a change :) Result on http//66.102.9.104 look great for the sector I monitor.

    Can’t wait for Jagger4 ;)

  21. Thanks so much for the info Matt. It has been helpful as we fly out here in the dark.

    I’m particularly concerned about the spam sites out there. Can you reveal, when we report sites do you manually penalize them or do you only use them as information to adjust the algo to exclude them (if possible)?

    Take care,

    Marc

  22. Jagger4?? I thought the update has only 3 parts…

  23. Matt, you are confusing all of us.
    Actually Jaggar 3 was visible @ 66.102.7.104 on 11/04 and it spread accross all datacenters. Now, only two datacenters (66.102.9.104 and 66.102.11.104) needs to settledown. I hope all updates to get over in another 24 hours.

  24. jarv75

    With regards to the spam reports. Is Jagger concerned at all with hidden h1 keywords (using CSS). One of your previous posts mentioned this and I’m seeing lots of this in the serps (mainly by css-oriented web agencies). I’ve sent a couple of spam reports with jagger3 in the “additional details” box but nothing seems to happen.

  25. Martin Ice

    If this it on 66.102.9.104 I will stop using google and switch to Yahoo.
    Search for “10m HDMI”. In the first 20 results are 8 ebays!
    ? Google you are only a shadow of what you were once.

    Greetings
    Martin

  26. Matt I need some help all my sites faired well with the big update except for one
    I have double and triple checked everything on this one website and still nothing doesn’t show up etc…… Please help if you can

  27. Brian

    Hi Madd!

    Thanks for the great infos you sent us the last days. Hope everything is working after jagger3 is ended.

    Can you please send us some infos about the sandbox effect? I think this is a real problem for most webmasters.

    Greedz from germany

    Brian

  28. Peter Faber

    Matt,

    Can’t make it to Vegas, but when you ever get the chance to visit the new Google office in São Paulo, Brazil, let me know! :)

    Peter

  29. Lynne

    The only difference I can see is that all of the pages that have Google ad’s now outrank me,(1-2 spots) and most of them are just pages so people can make money off of affiliate links. So the consumer searching for my product actually gets another page with more searching for what they are looking for. I think it’s BS, and just another way for Google to make money. If Google’s interest is in having the best search engine, in my opinion, they are failing miserably.

  30. Kelly Jones

    All I can say is thank God it’s over!

    Most all our positions (and those around ours) are back to pre September 22nd. No idea what on earth this was all about as all sites/positions in our industry remain relatively unchanged except for the last 45 days which were pure hell.

    That said, we severely slipped in MSN during the same time period — probably as a result of fixing some random 302′s and using robots.txt to shut down some old duplicate path ways.

    I’m tired!

    Matt, a special thanks to you not only for communicating with us as a group but also for your personal message to me here on the blog. Knowing that we weren’t manually penalized made all the difference in the world.

    Thanks again!

    KJ

  31. Aaron Pratt

    Martin,

    Ebay is VERY relavant, get used to it and if you sell a product I highly suggest using them while you are waiting your turn.

  32. Martin

    Sorry if this might have been asked before: Do you receive spam reports from other countries too if they are marked with “jagger3″?

  33. Hey, Matt!

    Is there a recommended URL for reporting sites that appear to have been exponged by Jagger that really shouldn’t?

    I maintain two sites — neither of them spammish whatsoever — and both of their SERPs have been gutted.

  34. Aaron Pratt

    Brazil is like the wild west and should mature on it’s own for a few years.

    Also, if you eliminated all the spam in Brazil wouldn’t there be nothing left?

    KIDDING!!! ;-)

    I feel for you Peter…hehe

    -Aaron

  35. Silvia

    Hi Matt,
    I am a big fan of google, but this update has killed my website.
    I have a dmoz-based-directory since 1999.

    Monday all my traffic is disappeared, I work a lot to implement dmoz results, and now I must close my site??? A mirror of Dmoz is spam? :(

    Thanks for your reply.
    Silvia from Italy

  36. Hi Matt,

    excuse me for my bad English. I have a significant problem since the installation of jabber, and I do not know where I will be able to announce my problem.

    I created a blog at this address: http://gestion-facile.viabloga.com.

    To have a URL more professional, I bought the address http://www.gestion-facile.com and I followed the instructions of my supplier (viabloga.com) so that my blog has the address http://www.gestion-facile.com now.

    But since jabber, google seems to think that http://www.gestion-facile.com is a mirror site of gestion-facile.viabloga.com !

    my 128 links recorded by google previously passed to zero. and indeed google sends very definitely less visitors to me than before.

    how to correct the problem?

    thank you

    olivier

  37. Ledfish

    Individual experiences may vary, but from my standpoint, the update looks ok. My site actually stayed at approximately the same position or maybe went up a place or two.

    I reported a popular site that was heavily spamming in my industry. I reported it after jagger1 and again after jagger2 and no alas it is gone. I noticed they got rid of the spam quickly so I’m going to assume they got one of those nice e-mails from the spam team at google.

    My only complaint at this point is that on or about Feb of 2005 our internal pages stopped ranking. They are indexed, but just don’t rank. We did find that we had unintentionally caused an internal duplicate content problem by revamping our urls. We have gotten almost if not all of the old urls removed from the index via the removal tool. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to have fixed the problem. IT is almost as if we are still getting the penalty or that even though they are no longer are visible via search at Google, they are not gone from Googles index and thus we are still being hurt by the old urls.

    Matt, any idea what people who have a similiar type of problem (I know there are others) need to look at ?

    BTW, we had some dynamic urls we tried to get removed via the removal tool by adding the /*? directive to our robots.txt file. Unfortunately when we did this, the removal tool refused to remove them saying that the directive was invalid because wildcard characters are not valid in a robots.txt file. We ended up finding a way to remove them manually, one at a time.

  38. Gede

    Matt,

    is it normal that SERPS from search.com show up in the Google SERPS?

  39. I’m happy in my own little way (although that has been the case for the last 24 years of my life).

    My question is this.

    Using the IP/datacentre thing that Matt has supplied how would we filter for UK results?

    Does adding ‘&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB’ work? Cos I tried that and fell off my chair after seeing the results.

    Also Matt – if I ever met you how many brown bags filled with cash would it take for you get my http://www.best-mortgage-insurance-poster-not-a-pyramid-scheme-honest-guv-get-your-free-xbox-360-and-ipod-here-sausages-so-fresh-the-pig-don‘t-know-they’ve-gone-yet.com site to rank #1 for everything?

  40. Martin Ice

    Aaron,

    you are kidding. Ebay is an platform for itself. Everyone knows it. Everyone knows how to get there. So if i search for something, i want to find some good internetshops with informationand poeple with knowledge. Not some sellers that sell their products after work without having declared an business and pay no taxes. So it is silly to put ebay auctions into serps. Aaron in your opinion the big ones rule. So where is the place for the smaller ones? Look at ebay. They make a lot of money. But how many poeple do they employ? Don´t forget it is the smaller business that employ the poeple and pay taxes. So give it a chance to make their business.
    Afterall, you look at the serps and find auctions that ended last day? IMHO its not relevant.
    Google was THE seach engine to find certain information. But now the do the way all other search engines go. They show serps that you´d expect but i want serps gives me the AHA effect. To find something that i did not expect.
    So meanwhile i went to yahoo, cause i couldn´t find what i was search for at google. Yahoo presented me no ebay ( great ) and i a made a find on 2nd side of serps.
    Back to ebay. Ebay is everywhere. Look in the sky. Maybe there is just a plane with a poster from ebay. Go in the subway you possibly find advertising from ebay. So if they are although present in the serps, u get a monoculture.

    just my opinion,

    greetings
    Martin

  41. I’m hoping things stay as they are now. We disappeared entirely from SERPS some months ago. Gradually we worked ourselves back. No naughty techniques used. Then Jagger kicked in again, cue bucking bronco rankings. Now they’ve settled and we’re number 1 (ish) in so many key terms, it’s absolutely beautiful.

    It’ll change tomorrow no doubt :-(

  42. Hi Matt

    Thanks for the udpate. I see a lot less spam on 66.102.9.104, and basically you have review and remove all the spammy web sites that I have suggested.

    This jagger updated doesn’t apply to google.mx and google.es, right ??
    Where can I report spam from this search engines ??

    Regards

    Manuel Ramirez

  43. Hello Matt,

    thanks for giving the chance to test 66.102.9.104 and see how google search results will look like – hopefully: soon.

    (Please excuse my strange English – I’ m from Bavaria in Germany.)

    Personally I am not happy and desparately try to understand :

    a) It seems that google with jagger 1 – 3 does not consider that there is a difference between small sites promoting just one business goal and a catalogues (like my tourisme region http://www.ammersee-region.de).

    Example: Webmaster a) optimizes his site to be found by keyword search “hotel xyz” (xyz is the for example a geographical situation like “near munich”, “bavaria”…)

    Webmaster b) has to optimize his site for all the hotels in the region concerned. That seems to be much more difficult after jagger3.

    b) The website I have to care for, for the time being offers the largest list of hotels (I hope I can hold this standard after Jagger 3!) There are some national & also international acting webmasters who “just” realized that the ammersee-region could be interesting (it’s my own fault. With help of google I told “the world” that this region is beautiful, described exciting landscape, sports, fun, events, …). Now, they optimize to be found by google when searching for example “ammersee ferienwohnung” – and only can show up 10 (or even less) entries to the visitor.

    c) On each page of my site there is a small box inviting my visitors to give a comment: ok – bad – good.

    Most of the comments complain “not enough information”… This is the reason, why I spend all my time in research & further informing the visitors. But it seems that the more pages there are, the less important they get? (See a) – there is a difference between small “private” sites and comprehensive theme presentation). My question: Do you think that google will find a method to consider this problem?

    d) jagger 1/2 were finding pages on the “alias” site. Today also 66.102.9.104 listet search results from this alias. I asked my provider: It is not possible to delete this alias (otherwise I would delete all!) – it belongs to the site. No chance to help! The alias just shows the same as the original address – but sometimes shows up in the search result on top postions. I tried to tell .htaccess to forward to the right URL. But jagger3 did not (yet) understand… (I understood that google does not like “duplicate pages” – how can I tell google, that they are not copies??? As far as I know I never invited google to visit this alias. I tried to use the google form to delete the alias from the index – but this requests an entry in the robots.txt – which would – because of original & identical pages – effect the site).

    I would really very much appreciate to get an answer to above questions – in advance I apologize for your efforts in simply trying to understand :-))

    Best regards from sunny & lovely ammersee-region in Germany,

  44. Aaron Pratt

    Martin,

    Let me give you an example of balanced results I am seeing. I am trying to get a small niche site going for my neighbor who makes outstanding dog gift baskets. If you do a search for “dog gift basket” yes there are many on page #1 who are huge pr monsters that rule with just a single page when our site is dedicated to this. Currently we have moved up to #14 but in a small niche this will not help my neighbor pay the bills. We need to be #1, so how do we compete with the big pr junkies that want to literally own everything? We just keep doing what we are doing, do some charity stuff and maybe pick up a few links and visitors from the events we spend many hours at, in other words, forget about the serps! In time Google will reward us with the #1 position because there is no denying that what we do is good. My first website is a perfect example, I knew nothing about search engines when I made it and it succeeded in Google on it’s own…so can yours!

    There are many examples of low pr, few backlinked websites beating out About.com in the currently results. In fact, I am really impressed with Google, there appears to be a healthy playing field where all can succeed if they just shut the hell up and keep working at it. Yes you can find example of blant success of spam but guess what, they will not succeed over time so do not worry about it. Also if you are like me, who just can’t shut the hell up do a blog and blah blah blah for comic relief! ;-0

    -Aaron

  45. Stupid question, Matt:

    As someone who is not American, I was curious as to how we would go about checking the J3 update in terms of looking for a results from a specific country; in my case, Canada. I think Manuel Ramirez has the same question, although I’m not sure I understand it correctly.

    Or do I just have to wait patiently until the J3 update migrates across the data centers?

    Also, how much flux is still left?

  46. Matt,

    You’ve been given a hard time of late, and thats to be expected I guess, as you can’t please all of the people all of the time.

    I can only express my honest opinion, and I see the update as a major success for many people with whom I’ve spoken. Getting indexed at the top has the mathematical probabilities against most websites, as there are only a certain number of top positions for the billions of websites.

    Being indexed for free is a privelage, and being indexed/ranked high is a bonus. Additionally, if people want to risk the success of their business in the hope that a single search engine will rank them high, then they need to rethink their strategies. Google is the top search engine, and to be indexed on it is all I ask. If I wish to get on the first page of the SERP’s there is always Adwords! If you want a top spot on TV channel advertising you pay for it! What’s the difference? The difference is with Google you have the chance to be on a top spot for free, aswell as paid inclusion choices.

  47. Brian M

    Hi Matt,

    66.102.9.104 looks great, and I especially like the Supplemental results being pushed down to the end. Nice move and I hope it sticks.

    I have one suggestion – drop a Supplemental result after it ages for more than a year. There are many pages cached from March 2004 that were deleted last year and have suddenly re-appeared in the Supplemental results.

    P.S. Thank you for all of the updates!

  48. Stephen

    Matt

    Do you expect that Googlebot will be unleashed after the update has finished – I have not seen him for a while.

    Cheers

    Stephen

  49. Do stuffed meta tags and multiple domains resolving to a single site (other than misspellings) also constitute spam?

  50. Stephen

    Just want to expand on my comment re Googlebot crawling.

    Could it be said that the full ramifications of this update will not been known for some sites until after a crawl has been completed.

    Cheers

    Stephen

    PS. Sorry if my posts are to controversial sometimes :( – I dont mean any harm – I hope they do sometimes at least give worthwhile feedback, here and at WMW – Thanks

  51. Matt

    Danny, I would definitely feel free to do a spam report (even for Dutch sites) if they’re still there. Martin: yes, we do get feedback on other languages and act on them. Manuel Ramirez, I’d love to hear your spam reports–I believe we’ll pay more attention to international areas soon.

    Brian M, I’ll pass that feedback on. Stephen, most/all of the update is visible at this point.

  52. Three things I learned about Google and updates:
    1. Don’t use questionable SEO tactics
    2. Think long term. Build your site with solid content and design
    3. Don’t panic at the first sign of update

    Thanks for the update Matt.

  53. Maria

    With Jagger 2 I’ve seen my website where it belongs, ….but I’m not happy with Jagger 3, it’s not correct yet…..Matt, it will be more changes in the algoritm, many webmasters say so???
    Thanks…..(sorry my english, i’m argentinian)

  54. This drives me NUTS !!
    You can do all the right things and there’s always something else.
    Our sites haven’t ranked well on google for years now.
    I was just getting some back up there and now a another update.
    Someone stated “don’t use questionable tactics” right ??
    To compete you need to do whatever it takes. In football
    not every penalty is called. That’s the way you have to do SEO.
    Or your out of the game.
    Just a thought !!

  55. dfre

    Hi Matt,

    It would be nice if there were a way to get old pages permanently removed from the supplemental index. I have a large number of pages that got in there due to dumb/sloppy webmastering from back when I didn’t know any better. Many are duplicates of good pages on my site, only with a slightly different case…i.e. /widgets.html vs. /Widgets.html. Some are duplicates as a result of domain.tld vs. http://www.domain.tld.

    I have fixed the problem on my end that allowed it to happen, but I don’t see any way to remove them from the supplemental index. I have heard that if you use the removal tool, that a) it will remove both cases /widgets and /Widgets, (not good!) and b) they will come back in a few months.

    I feel like these pages are possibly hurting the rankings of some of my legitimate pages.

    Thanks for listening, and thanks for your constant updates.

  56. Y.M.

    Hi Matt,

    Thank you for the info.
    I can’t imagine going back to the days prior to MattCutts.com. You are the best.

  57. pteam

    Matt,

    Just wanted to say thanks for the update. Its great that google has finally sent somebody like you, during times like these people would be losing their minds! :)

  58. Matt thanks for the updates and see you in Vegas!

    I’m guessing you are a heck of a good blackjack player?

  59. Johnny Drako

    Results I’m seeing here: http://www.mcdar.net/Q-Check/datatool.asp still show me at 30, where I’ve previously been ranked #2. This is a NIGHTMARE.

    I’m trying not to panic and know that, yes, the mortgage will be paid this month, just like all previous months.

  60. David W

    OK – but a way to go yet!

    Do a search for windows – serps show 844 million results – starting with yes, you guessed it microsoft. Followed by many other computer/ IT sites.
    However ALL of the adverts are for windows – as in house!!

    Don’t you just love it when technology dosn’t work. Te He He!

    There are some fundamental problems with the way SEs and SERPs wotk. As you can see above – one of the main problems is with interpreting what the search wants. Maybe some form of clustering is the answer. Do you mean A or B or C.
    Another problem is with the way the results are presented – that is in a heirarchical fashion – from 1 to 1000. The problem with this is that somebody else has choosen the ordering and it may not suit my requirements. Also it makes for a very rigid system of rewards for the websites. No 1 gets the lions share, the rest of page 1 and 2 get most of the rest and from 30 on down onebody gets much of anything. This is especially so for busy/ overcrowded areas such as travel/ hotels sites which attracts a lot of publishers – ourselves included.
    this is a problem that is parculiar to the web and serps. If I look in Yellow pages for a hotel – I choose which ones I look at – I don’t rely on somebody else to interpret what I am looking for. It is the heirarcy of results that is the problem. This in turn leads to frantic activity on behalf of webmasters to get their site ranked top or on page one. Also this leads as well to many – the vast majority – to be ranked nowhere.
    Could you not devise a system that had a random element to it – say the algo chose the best 500 or 1000 or whatever and they you allowed the searcher to choose the priority within that group. so they could go top down or bottom up or start at 500, 600, 700 or whatever. This would mean that far more sites can to the top on some occasions. Thats my idea – you can hire me if you want! Fairly modest fees!!
    Keep up the good work. DW

  61. dale

    Can you tell me the IP addresses for the Google Freshbot and Deepbot servers?
    I am using a script that tells me when the bots visit my site but the IP’s I have I believe are old, so I am not getting accurate data.

    Thanks

  62. David, what you are describing is the difference between a search engine, and a directory site (like a phone book). A phone book is a terrible analogy to a search engine.

    The yellow pages are meant to be a list. They do not take relevancy into account.

    The reason search engines are preferred, is that they DO take relevancy into account. If they didn’t, they’d be useless. I don’t want a listing of everything available, I want the most popular or reputable.

    That’s what Larry and Sergei set out to do years ago.. (well not really, they just wanted to track which documents got referenced more than others.. then realized that the more referenced you are, the more relative you must be)..

    I’m getting off topic, but any element of randomness in the final results will render search useless.

    Introducing some randomness to the method however, is sheer brilliance, and is why we continue to still pay google for paid search placement.

    Example: I can throw a ball against the wall and it comes right back to my hand. If I do it right, I can also have it hit 3 walls and come right back to my hand in the same spot. The final result wouldn’t be changed, but the path I took would be.

    Now apply this theory to the various 300 ranking factors google uses.

    If Google doesn’t already do this, I’m confident they soon will. While it won’t make the algorithm any more or less accurate, it would drive SEO companies crazy not being able to figure out how it works.

    Matt, you can hire me too. I even have the CS degree, and I’m willing to relocate from beautiful sunny Detroit.

  63. John Cain

    Matt,
    I reported this and nothing happed:
    ———-
    Is it above it’s own law/rules/regulations/guidlines?
    **************************
    Laughable to a nice guy about SEO ethics.
    ———————————————————————-
    I have been closely watching the thread http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum30/31688.htm and I think most of us good will webmasters are naive.

    From http://www.google.com/webmasters/guidelines.html ‘Quality Guidelines – Specific recommendations:’, google has violated 2 to name just a few in this year alone.
    1. Sometimes back, google was caught with ‘cloaking’ where it provided different results to search engine and users.
    2. ‘Don’t create multiple pages, subdomains, or domains with substantially duplicate content. ‘
    A search on both google and msn for
    -> “google.com/Top/Shopping/Clothing/Women” site:google.com

  64. John Cain

    Sorry truncated….
    —————–
    A search on both google and msn for
    -> “google.com/Top/Shopping/Clothing/Women” site:google.com

  65. sam

    I am at a loss. regarding my site: younevercall.com
    I wrote Google because:

    1) Many pages in Cache for my site are over 18 months old.
    2) Google ignores the sitemap I set up
    3) Pages of mine are being considered duplicate because they are erroneously cached with HTTPS (we dont use it)
    4) Site is gone from Google for relevant terms.

    Jagger seems to have screwed up the indexing of the site.

    Google emailed me back that they dont look at specific sites.

    What is the reccomended method of getting someone to notice the problem?

    thanks.
    sam.

  66. Stuart

    Search Engines Web…

    How can hidden links / text ever be appropriate? The only reason for their existance is to mislead. If you want your site spidered, create a sitemap – or use Google Sitemaps.

    “What difference does it REALLY make if someone choses NOT to show their Link Partners to the Public.”
    …Quite a big difference – links are supposed to be FOR the public not ONLY for search engines – get it?

    Its very good of you to provide tips to would-be spammers out there on how to incorporate hidden links, however the hope is that anyone using such techniques gets caught, reported and removed. Best of luck.

  67. Search Engines Web>>
    Google does not use meta keywords because of previous abuse of them. Sites can put in whatever words they want, to rank for a certain keyword, that may or may NOT relate to their website content.

  68. Brandon

    Also on meta keywords: much current thinking is that search algorithms punish sites that appear to have overdone their meta tags (too many, too unrelated, too many versions of the same words), regardless of if they put any relevance on the meta tags.

    So, using them may or may not help you with search engines (for Google, unlikely), but over-using them will probably hurt you.

  69. Armen

    Hello guys,

    My site has many more quality backlinks than what Google sees. Google actually shows the number 666 which I am not comfortable with (may sound funny).

    This is not something that I can report with Spam, but can I possibly report it as a bug or something?

    I would appreciate any help Matt.

    Thank you.

  70. http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:NWfEPshAdFAJ:www.cartmods.com/+x-cart+mods&hl=en

    It seems Jagger1, Jagger2 or Jagger3 haven’t done anything to help prevent spamming. Judging by the above url, still serving up different content to search spiders, along with keyword stuffing and duplicate content and yet Google has done nothing to penalize this particular url, my question is why?

    Surely there are some kind of filters in place to catch this as I’ve reported this url numerous times and have yet to see anything done about it. I will keep resubmitting a spam report until I see something done.

    Yet on my end, I’m not doing any tricky black hat SEO techniques, and yet I’ve been penalized myself (same type of business). It just makes me wonder if Google even cares about those whom abide by Google’s Terms of Service. As us legit people are just getting hurt by these updates and illegitimate webmasters are still way up in the index.

    One word comes to mind: Disgruntled.

  71. Al

    I have tested the new results and I must say that they appear to be littered with junk! These are the worst results that Google has put up there since the last timne it went through a debacle redux around last Christmas. It took them weeks to sort thyat one out.

    If this is the new algo, Yahoo and MSN should be happy.

  72. Dave

    RE: “the real problem is WHY is Google NOT using Meta Keywords”
    and
    RE: “Google does not use meta keywords because of previous abuse of them”

    I woudn’t jump to that conclusion without proof. There is no way to prove if they use them, or not.

  73. nah I don’t think the reason they don’t use META has anything to do with abuse.

    Rather, meta tags are put there by the author of the site. They are not a true indication of what the site is about, they are only an idication of what the author wants the search engine to think the site is about.

    Google’s (or any search engine) goal is to show you pages that are actually about a topic, not just because the webmaster says it is.

  74. Dave

    Ryan, you say Google does not use META tags, how can you say this as a fact?

    Also, with SEs, you have to think in terms of pages, not “sites”.

    Each page should have a unique Title, META description and keywords. All words in these 3 elements should be shown as visible text on the page. Do that and I believe SE’s will use them to some degree.

  75. Ledfish

    Armen

    I have to admit, if mine showed 666, I’d be uncomfortable too !

  76. Dave

    666 backlinks is better than 0 :)

  77. Armen

    So guys what can I do about this 666 back links?

    Yahoo shows several thousands of links for my site, but Google only 666.

    Matt can you suggest something?

    Thank you.

  78. Ledfish

    Armen

    Not much you can do, Google only shows a sampling of the links it recognizes for sites.

  79. Armen – link:yoursite.com is just a sample of links, not all Google links.

  80. What are we talking about here again, I forget! ;)

  81. Is there a concise report available on jagger update? The WW discussions are very helpful, but would like a summary kind of report. thanks.

  82. Dave

    He he. We are mainly talking about the number of the beast (I recall the Iron Maiden song).

    How, of your site is not on page 1, the SERPs for that page are no good ;) If you are on the page the SERPs are excellent :)

    Whether Google uses META data for ranking purposes.

    Oh, and a lot of talk about Mick Jagger :))

  83. Sarah

    Matt –

    YIPEE!! The pre-Jagger3 cache date of January 2005 for http://www.oursite.com/?referrer=google has changed to 9/27/05 :) Now we hold our breath to see if the SERPS acknowledge the 301 from http://www.oursite.com/?referrer=google to http://www.oursite.com.

    Unfortunately our host moved us to their new server, hence our IP changed, on Monday. Googlebot found us straight away, however your Java has yet to do same. (FYI – there isn’t any java on the site.)

    In any event, I’m ready to supply the canonical URLS when you give the word. And many thanks to you and your team for what must have been (still are?) 30-hour days.

    Best,
    Sarah
    Our URL is in my email address

  84. Harith

    Good morning Matt

    Oh man. Are you sure you want to go to Vegas and be on the receiving end of such questions :-)

    Coffee Talk with Senior Google Engineer : Matt Cutts
    Wednesday November 16
    Questions for Matt Cutts?

    http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum30/31971-2-20.htm

    Have a great day.

    P.S. Have you nticed that I have kept my promiss and not asked questions related to update Jagger :-)

  85. Oh my god that is SO NOT FUNNY. My site was banned tonight, right after my post asking if spammy sites are banned manually. Please tell me this is a sick joke!

  86. rite

    Hi there,

    after Jagger2 I complained in this blog about some obvious spam sites appearing in high positions for some German search terms. By now, these sites have more or less dropped in or even vanished from the rankings, except where they offer at least some related content: A BIG THANK YOU! I find it somehow impressing to see an enterprise of Google’s size and wingspan react on complaints from a webmaster, who is all about one-in-a-billion …

    Looking at sites webmastered from me, most of them do better, some very much better in their relevant rankings. Only one dropped from from SERP 1 to SERP 2. Hm, to be honest, I may have done some keyword stuffing there. Is it possible that Google kind of “warns” me about this by dropping the site some 10 or 15 ranks?

    Because, if I ask for its most important phrase with “allintext:”, it comes up on its usual second place again, which usually indicates the sandbox effect. But this site was online for years, it was relaunched a year ago and did well since …

    Have a nice weekend, everybody.

  87. rite

    rite again,

    not to have this blog spammed with spam complaints: I forgot to say that of course I made intense use of the known spamform adresses …

    THX.

  88. Bart

    On Webmastersworld 64.233.179.99 was suggested as a blended version of J3 with other results.

    Unfortunately that is not the case as there are titles listed that we already changed a month ago that come back on the above DC (other DC’s show the changed titles for a while already).

  89. sam

    HIDDEN TEXT NOW LEGAL?

    For Cerebral Palsy Attorney:

    http://66.102.11.99/search?hl=en&lr=&q=cerebral+palsy+attorney

    I am seeing the first result ‘www.cerebralpalsy.org’ has tens and tens of lines of hiding text at the bottom of the page.

    Is this no longer a problem?

    I reported this issue twice via the usual channels but it seems that no one cares.

  90. someone

    Is text with font size1 already hidden text or is it valuable content only to small to read ?

  91. Edward

    Matt,

    I’m doing some ‘amateur’ seo work for a friend. Would it be fair to say that he has been penalised if a search for his domain name (excluding the www. and .com and not a real dictionary word) returns him in about position 40 and ahead of him are sites that link to him or sites that have scraped his content.

    Regards

  92. Danny

    I’ve reported several sites and noticed that some of them are banned now.
    Some spam pages are still there but i understand you guys at the plex must receive thousands of spam reports per day. I’m very impressed with the way you are dealing with this.
    Way to go Matt !

  93. Roberto

    Look at this result too:

    http://66.102.9.104/search?hl=es&q=dise%C3%B1o+de+paginas+web&btnG=B%C3%BAsqueda+en+Google&lr=

    The six position in Spain, the web page name is http://www.hooping.net, they show a webpage for users, and if you get down you can see the SPAM.

    I report it, yesterday, but I think that Google has a large path until it stop all SPAM.

  94. Hi Guys, Just found this blog and i must say, it is interesting indeed!
    I’ve been watching google for quite some time now and noticed just today that the 64.233.183.104 datacenter has a problem with showing cached pages. Not only my website but also the sites of Microsoft, NS (Dutch Railways), and so on dont have any available cached version on that datacenter.

    Sometime in may 2005 there was a big PR update causing the same thing on a few datacenters… Could it be that a big PR update is coming up?

    Btw, Matt, plz don’t be offended for getting sooo much questions.
    Greetings,
    Alex from the Netherlands

  95. Matt

    rite and Danny, thanks. Folks, the best place to report spam is with the jagger3 keyword on the spam report form at http://www.google.com/contact/spamreport.html

  96. Roberto

    I continue watching changes in the index of 66.102.9.104, the Jagger3 update on this server isn’t finish, yet?

  97. Martin Ice

    Hey Matt,

    I have a technical question, maybe you can give me an answer.

    When u guys change the algo, do you have to >recalc

  98. Martin Ice

    Hey Matt,

    I have a technical question, maybe you can give me an answer.

    When u guys change the algo, do you have to recalc all pages in your index. Means like you take ever homepage and let in run through the new algo or do you have something like 100 parameters for every side witch are continioulsly generated and the new algo just puts the parameters in a different way for the serps.

    So if you have to recalc every page then your updates should have been on the road for about 3 month because of the tremendous work to do. Finally you did know the result from jagger already in June ?

    Greetings
    Martin

  99. Matt,
    I am submitting about 50 – 60 Adsense Spam reports using Jagger3 heading and Adsense Spam in the first part of each report. Since the technique is identical, so are my reports. These were generated using just one search expression on Jagger3 test site.
    I am sending this here only because I want you and Google to know that I AM NOT Spamming the spam report system, but just encountered all of these unique sites (most are managed by same individual). Most of the sites are identical in content. They all are using a spoofing redirect. They all seem to have the same Google Adsense internal ID in the Google ad java script.

  100. Matt,

    First of all thanks for offering a form of contact…2nd thankyou for keeping people updated to the best of your ability..

    Now for my question …….. My question is how in the hell are you dealing with the same people asking the same questions time and time again after you have answered them time and time again..Aren’t you giving as much information as you can and beaing as clear as you possibly can…

    PLEASE ANSWER THIS ONE….

  101. Hi matt ,

    You said.. ” Jagger3 was visible starting at 66.102.9.104 around 11/4/2005. Jagger3 is not widely visible yet (it might also be at 216.239.51.104), but I expect it migrate to other data centers over time. ”

    Why “66.102.9.104″ & “216.239.51.104″ has now with different results?

    Why the DC 66.102.9.104 isnt or slow spreading?

    thanks matt.

  102. Renato

    Hi Matt,

    We all speak about the term “Spam”. Perhaps we do not understand what is really Spam, or we have various opinions.

    For me spam, for example, is when in a page there is hidden text . Discover this situation whith an algo is relatively simple. If you do not this, for me to mean that hidden text is not spam. In my keyword market place, after J3, in first positions theare are pages whit hidden text, and hidden links.

    Now I think that I can replicate this technique in my site. In yahoo and Msn never theare are pages in first serps whith that problem.

    Greetings
    Renato

  103. Jay

    I agree with Renato in regards to spamming and hidden text – no penalty.

    I notice many pages with hidden text that hold the top position. Example: I search for used trailers and the number one spot has hidden text with spamming key words in the source code. It seems just because the name of the site is exactly key words used for the search it still has spamming hidden key words in its source code and holds top spot on many of those words. Now one would believe that if spamming is something that should be punished then why would the site be number one on first page on many of those words?

    Just a thought on spamming with hidden text and nothing seems to be done.

    Jay

  104. Mr B

    re: duplicate content, hidden text, landing page and no penalty.
    The home page of this site (a) http://www.chefwork.com , links to this site (b) http://www.chefworks.com (same content, different URL).
    Would (a) be considered a landing page for (b)?
    There is code in (b) that says “

  105. Mr B

    If there is code that says “Hide this script from old browsers ” or “HIDDEN” NAME” , does (b) use hidden text?

  106. Scotsman76

    Matt, release the cracken dude.

    Any more delays and I’ll report you to the RSPCD
    Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Datacentres, let 9x be free!

  107. Andrew

    Well, my last post on jagger1 or 2 update summed it up.
    Why waste my time reporting spam updates when once again nothing has happened – if anything more spam!!

    I was actaully fooled this time in thinking that if i inserted “jagger#” within the report it may actaully work – What rubbish!!

    These updates become more of a joke each time i see one.

    Sites ranking high on google are virtually just adsense ads, or stuffed full of hidden links & keywords.

    Well, at least i know what works, as for the next update my site will be stuffed to the brim as from these results i have no worries in turning into a black hat.

  108. Andrew,

    Before you go off all half-cocked and do something you’ll regret, you may want to consider the validity of the Internet rumour of the existence of…other search engines.

    If you start trying to black-hat optimize for Google, you will take yourself out of the game for at least one of the big 3 (MSN, Yahoo!, and Google) and may well even do so for the engine you’re trying to target.

    White hat does work…eventually. It takes time, and there are a lot of times where Google, MSN, and Yahoo! all are guilty of inadvertently pushing our sites down the SERPs in favour of spammers. (Side note: this is more an effect of too many idiots for the Big 3 to deal with, and all the different tricks they can come up with…every so often, something stupid is bound to happen.)

    But if you do a good enough job of worrying about the value your site offers to customers, rather than the value it offers to SEs, then the latter problem will take care of itself in the end.

    Just something to think about.

  109. Hi. My english grammar is poor. Sorry.

    Can I tell you my opinion on latest google’s index update?

    My site is directory.marangio.it that I’ve created to collection my interview and biography about famous girl.

    Before the J3 I was the first. Naturally my site was a authority in its segment and some site have linked mine. And it ranked well in Google because for its keywords it was in the first page of Serp. In Yahoo and MSN too. The text are mine, because I like write.

    I have had from google 12,000 unique visitors like max but now, today for example just 20 unique visitors. Yahoo and Msn are 5,000.

    Now my consideration. I do not think that i’ve made spam in my pages. Look for example at http://directory.marangio.it/donne/ludmilla-radchenko/ludmilla-radchenko.htm and report me some spam activity. I really do not think.

    Today if you look at some results in Google with the keyword, for example at the keyword Elena Santarelli, you get these results: http://www.tv-stars.it/elenasantarelli and digilander.libero.it/elenasantarelli that are the sames. My site there is no more.

    And many time first are web sites that make havy spam.

    I have raised the quality of the field. No more only photos and link stuffing, but photos and images with good comments.

    Do you think that anyone have reported my site like spamer? Can I ask to Google some explanation?

    Best Regards
    Luca

  110. Sarah

    Hi Matt,

    All spam reported last Wednesday/Thursday on 66.102.9.104, including KW stuffers, hidden texters, blank and/or 404′d pages, still present and accounted for :(

    Did I use the wrong DC?? Should I report this stuff again?? Don’t want to spam the anti-spam brigade.

    Safe journeys, restful holiday and many, many thanks!

    Sarah,
    The URL is in my email address

  111. Moving The Goal Line!

    Hi Matt,
    If Google and other SEs keep moving the goal-line, they will suffer from the same thing referees in sports do, everybody hates them. I have watched Google and other SEs closely for over 3 years now and I can say that most of the changes that are made to the algorythms are purely junk. The rich still get richer and the poor keep getting poorer. On top of that, for each spammer that is removed, a legitimate business is also removed and/or reduced to rubble. What’s up with penalties anyway? What happened to just reducing the value of certain SEO techniques? There is no consistency in anything that SEs do anymore. One day reciprocal linking is O.K. and the next it isn’t! One day alt text is good for disabled people and the next it is a spam technique! Also, no search engine on the planet is really reducing the value of paid one way links and the same sites are still dominating the SERPS as always. Small businesses such as mine are paying a huge price for trading links with RELEVANT partners and this has been one of the only ways for the small business to succeed because they don’t have a huge marketing budget and can’t afford to pay for links like the big boys. There are sites all over the Internet that will put up a link for money and they don’t publish this on their site anywhere a Google employee might see it. I also see many links still showing in the SEs for companies like Gateway that are no longer on the pages referred to at all. Not only that, there is an injustice in counting links for a company based on them sponsoring some event, etc. These should be weeded out also because they are paid links. Actually it appears to me that with every update comes a more clear indication that the top dogs are the only ones benefitting. Oh yeah, and how can any SE say that they are not hand coding the SERPS when they are accepting SPAM submissions at all. You can’t tell me that SEs such as Google don’t look at the results that come from each algo change and further tweak their algo to get the sites THEY want to see at the top believing that these are also the sites the searcher wants to see. If you do, you’re a liar. Not only that, if G thinks that this is a good way to code the SERPS, they are sadly mistaken because most searchers have already heard of Amazon, EBay, Gateway, Dell, Apple, etc. and what they really want are alternatives. Not just local alternatives either. This is the only thing that I have noticed with G since June/July of this year. For all E-commerce searches, the “small guy” has been literally obliterated and replaced with more “big guys” than ever! Are the “big guys” doing most of your spam reports I wonder? Or is it because they are paying G for paid listings and G doesn’t want to lose their bread and butter income? Either way it just stinks. No coincidence that all of these drastic algo changes have come since G went public I would surmise.
    Why doesn’t Google stick to it’s motto to “Do no evil” and quit penalizing sites unless and until a formal review has been done of the site in question and the webmaster contacted so they know what they are doing wrong and allow IMMEDIATE re-inclusion and re-ranking once the problem is corrected? This would be a work load but not when G isn’t wasting all of it’s time tweaking it’s algo and catering to the rich buttheads of the world that buy it’s stock or advertise with their paid listings. I believe that there would be many happy webmasters out there that would no longer have to change their site every time an algo change takes place. In other words, quit algo changes all together. Get a good algo that rewards sites equally for all good techniques, content, and FREELY GOTTEN LINKS (not including any internal links because big sites are benefitting from this) such as the DMOZ link we waited forever for and anguished over that doesn’t seem to count anymore, regardless of the size of the site or frequency of updates to it and quit moving the goal line and publish EXTREMELY CLEAR Webmaster Guidelines that state exactly what is O.K. and what isn’t, forever to never change unless a huge new problem appears and advertise the changes to the guidelines everywhere possible ahead of any changes to the algo so people and businesses aren’t surprised and don’t lose much valued traffic and business because of the change as long as they make the required changes. Also, strongly consider reducing the “Local” search effect on SERPS as it is destroying the Internet business that caters to the whole U.S. or international clients, unless you have a way of differentiating between them. This I see is a growing trend with all SEs and they should all take heed. Searchers don’t always want to buy something online and then go pick it up at the local store. Many searchers prefer to purchase something from a company in another state that won’t charge them tax or provide a better service than locals, etc.
    I believe that G and other SEs still have a chance to make these changes and put everyone, including themselves, on an equal playing field with the same goal-line. ( Wasn’t this the original purpose of Google and why it has prospered thus far?) If they don’t, someone will, and they may become the next Google, Yahoo!, or Microsoft. Perhaps, I’ll consider it myself if I continue to see my line of business get more and more one-sided because of current SE ranking techniques. Or perhaps G will send me an offer themselves :).
    Please remember that machines are only as good as the people designing and operating them. What’s the old saying I used to hear in computer class? “Garbage in, Garbage out”! Without the PROPER human intervention, a machine will continue to produce the same crappy results.

    Good luck.

  112. Lori

    I thought my site was coming back, but unfortunatly, the url (now 404) that hijacked my home page in February is back in full glory, cache and all. Will google ever index my home page again? Is it because of this URL? My site is valuable, all handwritten, original information and it’s like having the head cut off! Please Google, get rid of dead URLS.

  113. Kelly Jones

    Hey Matt,

    Just wondering when www (66.102.7.104 in my case today at least) are going to be fully Jaggerized#3 so I can tell my industry?

    Thanks,

    KJ

  114. Dave O

    Matt:

    It was referenced in the comments above and I’ve seen others mention it but with regard to starting dates for Jagger1, a number of webmasters noticed this starting on 9/22 not in mid October.

    Any comments?

    Dave

  115. Hi Matt,

    I became familiar with your blog looking for reasons for the recent drastic drop in traffic.

    Jagger 3 has been disaster in my case, and I am not certain why. For the last few years I have seen a steady growth of traffic, working hard on quality of the content.

    The traffic I receive from Google to my site just dropped 70 percent from since Nov 6. Most of my top positions I had disappeared and without an apparent reason. I am really puzzled about this.

    Any suggestions on what I should do, will be much appreciated.

    Thank you in advance,
    Ronen

  116. J.

    So much for Jagger3 eh!

    If part of this update was to filter out hidden text, door way pages etc then it has failed on a massive scale from where I am sitting.

    The system was pulling better results before the update. In one particular sector that I work in, it is now bringing back results from the old school, jees, on the first couple of pages there are hidden text home pages, landing pages complete with obvious duplicate content, keyword stuffing and duplicate websites on different domain names and thats just in one area, I am seeing it in others aswell.

    Jagger4 should exist to revert back to Jagger0.

    Rant over, enjoy.

  117. Hello Matt,

    every day I spend some time testing Jagger3 search for keywords relevant to my site. Often I find results belonging to an “alias” of my domain. In the .htaccess I place a mode rewrite command to send visitors (and robots) to the “real site”. The alias is (so says the provider) just a necessary thing – not a physical address or subdomin. Necessary for the administration of the server – it only points to the content of the real site. How can I prevent Google from searching it? I am afraid, too, that google could consider this alias-address to be a duplicate – spam?
    I really would appreciate an answer – although I know that you are fed with work and requests up to your mouth or so…
    Thank you (perhaps some other readers know an answer?)
    Best regards to all of you from pretty lake ammersee in Bavaria, Germany,

    Karin

  118. Matt,
    Would it be possible for Google to put together a little online program that lets a webmaster enter a URL and returns a report stating/rating what is wrong with the page or website that is causing google to sideline it?

    We have a site that has all but disappeared from Google, despite being online for 9 years with thousands of pages of original content, since the Jagger updates. Our traffic is now 1/10th what it was (shows how powerful Google is on the net). I cannot figure out what we did wrong to lose our hard earned listings.

    I think working together with webmasters, as you have started to do, we can come up with much better search results for everyone. If you guys could give us a clue as to what is wrong, then we can improve our visibility while offering better targeting for your users.

    I can understand your need for trade secrets, but hiding this filtering information from webmasters makes it very difficult for us to do our jobs effectively. Come on, open up and give us the feedback we need to be better.

    Thanks!
    Skip Stone

  119. GWizz

    Matt,

    Jagger 3 still doesn’t appear to have settled down, and 66.102.9.104 has not spread across other data centres as I’d assumed it would (though it does now appear to be at 66.102.7.104 too). Are the 66.102.9.104 datacentre results due to propogate, or has Jagger 3 changed direction or ground to a halt?

  120. Having finally seen Jagger3 show up on the google.ca datacenter, does this mean it’s almost over and we can start naming the next update?

    If so, I vote for Margaritaville! (Jimmy Buffett rules!)

  121. Andy

    Can someone please comment if this is classed as a bridging page?

    http://www.tacklebargains.co.uk/Fishing_Hooks.htm

    As this site comes up top for a lot of “fishing keywords” within Google UK searches?

    Its been there through all the Jagger processes, so it this OK to do, if not why is it still there?

  122. What is going on with this update? The results stink!

    Searched: Sarasota MLS because I want to search for properties for sale in Sarasota, Florida
    Example: http://64.233.171.99/search?hl=en&q=sarasota+mls

    #1 – Sarasota Board of Realtor – No public access. Can’t search for Sarasota properties here. How is this site going to help me? It can’t unless I want to know about the Sarasota Board of Realtors, which I don’t.
    #2 – Sarasota Board of Realtor – Same website as #1. Can’t search for properties for sale, why should this come up twice? I told you I was interested in the Sarasota MLS, not the Sarasota Board of Realtors.
    #3 – Good site, can search for properties for sale.
    #4 – Good site, however, same as #3. How about offering the searcher a different website?
    #5 – My site. Good site. Obviously biased. Can search the Sarasota MLS with the most comprehensive search available – multiple photos, agent remarks, maps, locations. Everything a buyer wants to see when searching for a home. I don’t expect Google to figure all of this out but it is true.
    #6 – Another template site with duplicate content. You can searh for property, however the search is not that great. I know this but I don’t expect Google to know this.
    #7 – Good site but too busy. I can search for properties here but I get lost in all of the useless, spamming text.
    #8 – This is a good site. I can search for properties here.
    #9 – Same site as #8. How about giving the searcher another option? This is just the home page for #8. I already found this website on #8 which is the actual search page. Why do I need the home page?
    #10 – Where the hell do I search for properties? I’m lost! The MLS requires a sign up. I don’t want to sign up. Again, I don’t expect Google to figure this out either but most people want to search without signing up.

  123. Hi Matt:

    It was nice to meet finally in Las Vegas. I heard so much about you. I appreciated your humble and open attitude and willingness to answer questions. That was the opposite of the Yahoo speaker (Tim).

    Since jagger started, I had variuos results with my sites (I have about 14 sites that target different markets in Florida real estate). My sites were in many cases in the top 3. Now, only one site in the top 4 and the other sites do not appear in the first 7 pages. Some even show the terrifying “Supplemental results”.

    I will send them to you for any input. Any feedback will be appreciated. I will not list him here since it’s not my intent to advertise my sites.

    jagger works to some extent, I have seen some spam sites being removed from google which was a great help to clean the searches. Thanks for the response.

  124. Hi again:

    Any word where you can submit your site for re-review.

  125. Matt,

    Thanks for all the information you provide here, it is much appreciated.

    This might not be exactly related to Jagger3 but still, it deals with Google webmaster guidelines and such, hence we decided to ask it here. We were trying to figure out why our site ranks poorly and while analyzing different issues came across a site that stole our design and on one page even copied our text word by word – so thouroughly that they even forgot to replace our domain mentioned in the text with their own! – is there any need for better proof of duplicate content and who’s the one duplicating it? (Infact, after some more research, we’ve found out that they have two exactly identical sites on two different domains, both of them copying our text on their FAQ page with our domain name there). I have submitted spam reports to Google through the page you refer us to in this post – is there anything else I need to do in this case and what will be the result – will the violating sites be removed from the index and how soon can this happen? Thanks.

  126. Luke

    Hi Matt,

    The Google result: http://www.google.com/search?q=www.mattcutts.com&btnG=Search

    Still says: “Sorry, no information is available for the URL http://www.mattcutts.com

    But: http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.mattcutts.com&btnG=Search

    returns many pages!

    This exact thing has happened to our site (see my email address) where there are no results for our home page, but the site: command returns all our pages – including our home page (albeit with a DMOZ description) !!!

    Why is Google not matching our home page to a query for that page – what do you think is happening? Is this the same situation as you have?

    Luke

  127. When will this really end? I am still seeing jumps of over 9,000 up and down still for keywords, some up, mostly down. Some keywords I had regained some fair ranking for are down today.
    Carol

  128. Ted Z

    Hey Matt!

    Looks like the roller coaster ride is over. What do you say? Can we go back to our knitting?

    Maybe you should start a “Name the Update” blog……

    Cheers,
    Ted

  129. Star

    I have never met that many self-centered jerks.

    Do you guys think the world evolves around you and your sites ?

    “When will Google do what webmasters want ?” LOL

    Get real !

    Bye

  130. I’ve seen a lot of complaints by web site owners in quite a few forums, but in all honesty, the sites that are having problems are pretty much only those that have little or no natural (not reciprocal or directory links) inbound links.

    I think Jagger was a good update & hopefully it removed a lot of the garbage on the internet.

  131. Few days ago, few spamming sites that were removed during jagger, have been listed back again. The sites have hundreds of doorway pages, hidden texts, mirror sites, duplicate contents and stuffing keywords. I wrote several times since then but no response.

    It’s disappointed to see these sites coming back and taking over top spots in google and spaming hundreds of SERP’s after being caught already by google.

    I am not sure what say here.

  132. The Jagger Update was completed around November 18th according to http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/the-little-301-that-could/

  133. Quite intresting discussion going on which i really appreciate. Well duplicate page content is a big problem as several websites tend to copy the content of reliable information sources without references. Wat I need to ask from u people is that if i find such webpages that are copying my content without my permission and without a formal reference to my website what shoul i do? Secondly if a website places my content with a formal reference to my website how advantageous or disadvantagous it is ?

  134. if I have many backlinks from one domain, for example there is a link that points to my site on every page of a domain and there are a 1,000 pages, will that trigger any ‘link farm’ filters?

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

If you have a question about your site specifically or a general question about search, your best bet is to post in our Webmaster Help Forum linked from http://google.com/webmasters

If you comment, please use your personal name, not your business name. Business names can sound salesy or spammy, and I would like to try people leaving their actual name instead.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

css.php