Comments on: Page Strength http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php SEO Blog is a blog with a purpose Fri, 10 Sep 2010 02:30:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3 By: duz http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php#comment-82 duz Thu, 14 Sep 2006 06:00:34 +0000 http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php#comment-82 Bob - The second chart (r=0.8) shows what you want, the correlation for the data points for ILQ values 0 to 6,000. >Also I am wondering if Rand’s good use a 0 to 100 million scale whether the correlation coefficient would change. If the method of calculation remained the same then it may be different but not by much because the distribution would be similar. Bob - The second chart (r=0.8) shows what you want, the correlation for the data points for ILQ values 0 to 6,000.

>Also I am wondering if Rand’s good use a 0 to 100 million scale whether the correlation coefficient would change.

If the method of calculation remained the same then it may be different but not by much because the distribution would be similar.

]]> By: bobmutch http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php#comment-79 bobmutch Wed, 13 Sep 2006 17:57:09 +0000 http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php#comment-79 duz: With the list of directories there is the top 6 that range from 5,800,000 to 44,000 and then the rest are from there it is 10,000 to 42. This shows us that there are a few very high ILQ directories and then a bunch of low ILQ directories. I would be interest to see a graph on the directories from 42 to 10,000 and see what the correlation coefficient is. Looks like your list is from 55k to 58k. Also I am wondering if Rand's good use a 0 to 100 million scale whether the correlation coefficient would change. duz:

With the list of directories there is the top 6 that range from 5,800,000 to 44,000 and then the rest are from there it is 10,000 to 42. This shows us that there are a few very high ILQ directories and then a bunch of low ILQ directories.

I would be interest to see a graph on the directories from 42 to 10,000 and see what the correlation coefficient is. Looks like your list is from 55k to 58k.

Also I am wondering if Rand’s good use a 0 to 100 million scale whether the correlation coefficient would change.

]]> By: duz http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php#comment-72 duz Wed, 13 Sep 2006 06:09:29 +0000 http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php#comment-72 Bob I took a look ILQ compared to PR for you, using the data from your site <em>General Web Directories Rated by Inbound Link Quality (ILQ).</em> The first chart using all the data where PR ≠ 0 shows a weak correlation. <img src="http://www.seo-blog.com/images/prilq1.gif" alt="PR and ILQ all data" /> I am sure that this is due to the extreme values for a few of the results. If these are removed from the data set there is no correlation. <img src="http://www.seo-blog.com/images/prilq2.gif" alt="PR and ILQ partial data" />   Bob I took a look ILQ compared to PR for you, using the data from your site General Web Directories Rated by Inbound Link Quality (ILQ). The first chart using all the data where PR ≠ 0 shows a weak correlation.

PR and ILQ all data

I am sure that this is due to the extreme values for a few of the results. If these are removed from the data set there is no correlation.

PR and ILQ partial data
 

]]> By: bobmutch http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php#comment-69 bobmutch Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:10:00 +0000 http://www.seo-blog.com/page-strength.php#comment-69 Very interesting analyzation!!! I think perhaps the tool would have been better if they had left the 0 to 10 scale behind. I would be very interested to see how my ILQ rates compaired to PR. http://www.seocompany.ca/directory/ilqtool.html The ILQ is from 0 to 80 million. Very interesting analyzation!!! I think perhaps the tool would have been better if they had left the 0 to 10 scale behind. I would be very interested to see how my ILQ rates compaired to PR.
http://www.seocompany.ca/directory/ilqtool.html

The ILQ is from 0 to 80 million.

]]>