Message Board

General Discussion

General discussion about anything even only vaguely club or rowing related

Message board > General Discussion > Google Ranking


Google Ranking by dw229 - Wed 7th Apr 2004, 12:11pm
It have recently noticed that typing my full name into Google yields my rower profile as the number one result! Fame at last, amongst all the Daniel Walkers in all the world... Anyway, is this a general FaT phenomenon and what's changed, other than this site's immense popularity...

by Mike - Wed 7th Apr 2004, 12:26pm
dw229 said: Anyway, is this a general FaT phenomenon and what's changed, other than this site's immense popularity... It works for me, using my name as it is in the members profile (M J Goodson). Third place is also me (at work), but second place goes to some New Zealand based cricketer whose career batting average is a mighty 0.5. Quality.

by gf - Wed 7th Apr 2004, 2:00pm
Mike said: It works for me, using my name as it is in the members profile (M J Goodson). Third place is also me (at work), but second place goes to some New Zealand based cricketer whose career batting average is a mighty 0.5. Quality. Oh my God! Someone with a worse average than mine! (it's currently 0.75, and btw my profile is also top, even though a namesake originated jeux sans frontieres [sp.?])

by Martin - Wed 7th Apr 2004, 2:14pm
Google ranks sites primarily by how many other web sites link to them. i.e. If there are lots of links to something then it must be worth visiting. There are quite a few links to our website now so it is ranking relatively highly - thus the links to our website being at the top of the list. Our ranking may have gone up a bit in the last week or two - we attract quite a few extra links to us during the Bumps but it can take about a month for Google to trawl its way through the internet and notice them. I think there may also be some issue with how many pages Google bothers looking at... I have a feeling that it goes further into websites if it thinks they are more important. With our ranking gradually rising it may be that it is only recently that it has gone in as far as many of the rower profiles.

by Simon - Wed 7th Apr 2004, 2:22pm
My profile is 20th, behind loads of links related to Trinity's other Simon Blackburn.

by dw229 - Wed 7th Apr 2004, 2:37pm
We all know that Google ranks pages using PigeonRank(tm). Apparently Martin used something similar to design firstandthird.org :) Talking of cricket, have the respective captains been picked for this year's match yet and BPBCCC started amassing a squad of big-hitters?

by Martin - Wed 7th Apr 2004, 3:47pm
Simon said: My profile is 20th, behind loads of links related to Trinity's other Simon Blackburn. Kind of interesting. I have a theory. Maybe the current page rankings were calculated based on a moment in time when Mike had posted recently and was linked to from the front page. If Simon did not have a recent post and therefore lacked a front page link, he would only have been linked to from obscure pages on the site and would thus be less highly rated. If this is right, if you do post from time to time you might therefore expect how important you are in Google to vary reasonably significantly - depending on when Google's robot happens to visit and when they recalculate the ranking. i.e. Maintain a link on the frontpage if you want to stay at the top of the list?!

by Simon - Wed 7th Apr 2004, 4:04pm
Martin said: i.e. Maintain a link on the frontpage if you want to stay at the top of the list?! Or maybe more people are interested in philosophy and books than rowing? In case not, here's my attempt to stay on the front page...

by Andy - Thu 8th Apr 2004, 12:32pm
1. Andy Wong the ballroom dancer 2. Andy Wong the real estate agent 3. Andy Wong the artist 4. Andy Wong (picture of) at last Lents dinner Comedy.

by common - Thu 8th Apr 2004, 9:32pm
1-19=FaT.org 20=Oxford results page, varsity xcountry 21-69=FaT.org 70=cucbc message board (copied from FaT.org by an arsey Petrean) 71-89=FaT.org 90=auckland castle 10km road race results 91-122=FaT.org Apparently there were 189 results, but google wouldnt let me in on the rest. Maybe theyre all about the secret agent Keith Noble-Nesbitt out there whose identity cannot be revealed?

by IR Gimp - Fri 9th Apr 2004, 2:13pm
Keith's clearly got an advantage here, by having a weird name. How about a Google Specialness Rating (the lower the score the better)... GSR=(Highest result rank for your full name)/(Total number of results for your full name) I get ~5.03x10^-7.

by Not as common as Dan - Fri 9th Apr 2004, 2:16pm
5.71*10^-6

by Not first in the ranking - Fri 9th Apr 2004, 5:04pm
Mine is 1.59 x 10^-5. Although I'm more common than Matt, apparently, google thinks that family tree-related material seems more interesting than FaT.org. If it wasn't for FaT.org, then I'd be well down the list, although if you put quotes around my name, then my Varsity Match win features at number 54 on the list.

by 23 Today - Sun 11th Apr 2004, 2:55pm
Not first in the ranking said: Mine is 1.59 x 10^-5. Although I'm more common than Matt ... 5.71*10^-6 is smaller than 1.59x10^-5 which should mean my name comes up more often than yours, making me commoner

by Dubya - Mon 12th Apr 2004, 3:03pm
As John Earl I am at 6.4e-4; as John W Earl I am at 1.6e-2; as John William Earl my score is zero.

by Less special, but more common than Matt - Mon 12th Apr 2004, 6:26pm
23 Today said: 5.71*10^-6 is smaller than 1.59x10^-5 which should mean my name comes up more often than yours, making me commoner Happy birthday. Looking on Google gives 172,000 hits for Matthew Byrne, compared to 254,000 for Richard Bullock - but FaT.org is 1st on the list whilst searching for your name, but if you are searching for me, it is only 4th on the list, behind some family tree stuff. So whilst my name comes up more often, you are more special according to the formula

by AHLF - Thu 15th Apr 2004, 12:23pm
Or a Google Importance Rating (GIR): GIR = (First result not relevant to you) * (Total number of results). Obviously the larger the rating, the more important you are... I score pretty poorly (1.1 x 10^6)

by AHLF - Thu 15th Apr 2004, 12:29pm
The largest GIR I have found is generated using the name Jesus Christ. Assuming all of the pages are relevant, his GIR = 5 x 10^13

by Mike - Thu 15th Apr 2004, 12:36pm
AHLF said: GIR = (First result not relevant to you) * (Total number of results). Much more fun to do a GIIR (Google Images Importance Rating), so you can see what gimpy photos there are of you floating about, plus what all your alter-egos look like. I score 66 in this case...

by Me Me Me Me Me. - Thu 15th Apr 2004, 1:42pm
I got 43 hits out of 44 as FaT links. Aren't I popular? 43/43 if you only count uk links. so there you go.