Write the title to earn the click while keeping the core keyword present naturally, and when the two genuinely conflict, the click wins. The reasoning is simple: a keyword-stuffed title that nobody clicks wastes the position you fought to reach, because a high rank only matters if it converts impressions into visits. So the tiebreaker is click-first-keyword-present, not keyword-first and not keyword-dropped. Most of the time this is not even a real conflict, since a well-written title can carry the keyword and still be compelling, and you should treat true conflicts as the exception they are.
The keyword still belongs in the title; it just stops dictating the phrasing. Including the main term helps Google and searchers confirm the page matches the query, so dropping it entirely throws away an easy relevance and recognition signal. The shift is from forcing an awkward exact phrase to working the keyword in where it reads naturally, then writing the rest of the title to speak to what the searcher actually wants. You keep the keyword, you just stop letting it make the title clumsy.
When you cannot do both cleanly, favor the click. A title like a plain keyword string may look optimized, but if a sharper, more human title earns far more clicks from the same position, the sharper one delivers more traffic and signals better engagement, which is what the position exists to produce. A perfectly keyworded title that reads like a search query and repels clicks is a self-defeating optimization. The keyword without the click is potential left on the table.
Write for the click and keep the keyword natural. Lead the title with what makes the page worth choosing, fold the core keyword in where it fits the phrasing, and only sacrifice keyword placement, never the keyword’s presence, when a more clickable wording genuinely demands it. Judge each title by whether a searcher seeing it would pick your result over the others.