I'd like to hear the community's opinion on this, because I simply can't imagine Google is micromanaging keyword penalties like this.

We know Google is paying attention algorithmically to the factors you mentioned - anchor text, page titles, backlinks - but we also know these are just a few factors out of hundreds that determine a ranking.

Really, in the grand scheme of the web or the thousands of other results that also show up  for the keyword term you're talking about here, are the tiny changes you made big enough to make any difference at all?

Is the algorithm really that sensitive?  I don't know, but I really don't think so.

Anyone else?

So you think 3 or 4 new links and one anchor text change could be enough to result in any rank change, positive or negative (assuming at least a decently competitive keyword term)?

I don't know; I'm just asking.

Somehow missed the bottom of your post there where you responded to my question....  Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.

In my opinion - and it is just an opinion - trying to figure out specific reasons for fluctuations in ranking is an exercise in futility.  There are just way too many factors going on - both within your website and outside of it - that Google is using to determine rankings.

Not to say you shouldn't be concerned about the decline in rankings.  Here are two observations for you:

1. These are pretty competitive keyword terms, and the pages you have been using to target these keywords have a PA of 1, indicating to me that you will probably see ranking fluctuations until you get some quality links to these pages.  Compare your PA to the top 5 results, which all have PA in the 30s and 40s or more.

2. How long have you been tracking your rankings using SEOMoz Campaigns? Did you have steady rankings spanning several months and then see a decline or did you start tracking recently?  I ask because (at least in my experience) low PA pages targeted towards more competitive keyword terms tend to move up and down on a lot on the SERP, so if you just started tracking you could have come in on a peak and now be seeing the valley.

But if he had 50% keyword density to begin with he never would have ranked as highly as page 2 right?

Or maybe the existing over-optimization, coupled with the new anchor text made it the last "poof" that burst the bubble.  That makes sense to me.

Clarification: I'm not the one getting advice here, and I do think good help was offered for free, which should always be appreciated.

I just find anything that starts with sigh a little condescending - maybe it's just me, but I have encountered this condescension elsewhere in this forum from many very smart PRO members and I personally find it irritating.

Anderson probably doesn't even care and I probably shouldn't have said anything... No offense ninja just a pet peeve.