sandboxed!!

[lablinks]

That's what I don't understand how they know its him who made the links. The sandbox does exist I have currently 2 bloody sites stuck in it, like I was first page for a certain keyword and many others, now they are on page 62 for example of Google. I have checked and it is there so I know it exists.

Are you sure your backlinks are intact?

 

[googlemonster]

Are you sure your backlinks are intact?

What do you mean intact? Google has this filter for whatever reason, they can't possibly know I built the links (only presume). It seems that with new domains you can't build links that fast or receive traffic from google in a large quantity because this is what will happen.

Id be interested in testing this on another persons site, to see if the same thing happens. In theory the same thing should happen.

 

[antrvant]

still waiting google.

you can check keyword "car claims" or "car claims uk" in google, bing and yahoo will know the difference.

my site rank well on bing and yahoo, but nowhere in google.

 

[volund]

What do you mean intact? Google has this filter for whatever reason, they can't possibly know I built the links (only presume). It seems that with new domains you can't build links that fast or receive traffic from google in a large quantity because this is what will happen.

Id be interested in testing this on another persons site, to see if the same thing happens. In theory the same thing should happen.

The thing about the "sandbox" is a lot of times Google gives a new domain a benefit of the doubt and ranks it higher than it deserves at first while it figures out where to put it. If you put up a nice keyword rich site you can see this. After awhile the site will drop to where it really belongs whether you build links to it or not. In most cases this has nothing to do with your link building at all. Easy enough to test if you want to do so, build two sites in the same niche and make them as identical as possible without using identical content and build links to one and not to the other and track the results.

By intact I am sure he means do the links still exist? When you do a heavy xrumer or scrapebox run a fairly large percentage of the links will be deleted after awhile. Google sees the links and then sees that they have been deleted. Now that does hurt your rankings. The problem with those xrumer runs on a new site is not that there are too many links but that there is a lot of link being deleted which is harder for a new site to absorb since it has no track record.

Also you have link velocity to think about as well. When you do a huge run on a site (especially a new one) you get a lot of links really fast which make Google think you are popular and then nothing which makes Google think you are not popular any longer which is magnified by the fact that a lot of your links are being deleted and on a new site there is no existing base of links to modify this effect.

Think about those sites that go viral for one reason or another. They get a lot of links in a short period of time and go straight to the top of the rankings. Then they fall out of favor because people get bored and stop linking to them and in a lot of cases probably delete the links they have already created. When this happens Google sees that the page is no longer relevant and ranks them accordingly. This is not a sandbox this is part of the normal ranking algorithm. When you do those one time large link runs on a new site that is the behavior you are mimicking. It is not the number of links you built it is the pattern of links you built.

There is a large difference between building 30k links at one time and building 1k links a day especially on a brand new site with no links to start with. An older site that already has a bunch of links has built up some trust with Google and can absorb more links. An older site with a lot of existing links is also less likely to drop because of link churn because of that trust build up. What you want to do for a new site is mimic an escalating amount of interest in your site not a WOW and then nothing.

What you call the sandbox does not really exist like you are thinking. While I am sure that there is a number of links that can cause a manual review of a site and get a site penalized that number is much larger than the number of links we are talking about here. What you are seeing is Google's natural reaction to how it sees links. Just like Google reacts differently to different types of links the pattern of the links is considered as well.

 

[IamNRE]

Your site is only 25 days old. So is my site. I am ranking around page for my keyword with 1k competition "intitle" and 360K competition in normal search.

Any ways, before you shout sandbox look up google dance.

 

[lablinks]

What do you mean intact? Google has this filter for whatever reason, they can't possibly know I built the links (only presume). It seems that with new domains you can't build links that fast or receive traffic from google in a large quantity because this is what will happen.

Id be interested in testing this on another persons site, to see if the same thing happens. In theory the same thing should happen.

I have a domain I don't care for, if you wanna try. I can just make up a site for it, it's a few weeks old too.


volund pretty much explained in detail what I thought had happened.

 

[googlemonster]

What whatever you want to call it it's some penality or filter that doesnt allow it to rank on the keyterms anymore it seems. For example I ranked on the first page for popcorn movies, now its on page 62 or thereabouts. Were not talking about de indexing just a sandbox or penalty due to link velocity imo.

Here look at the graph from Google:

The odd thing is I see another site with a worse link graph than mine: meaning that most of his links are blog spam, whereas mine are varied, pretty much same age of site. Yet something tumbled me over a cliff.

 

[theguy2]

sandbox does exists, my site is currently sandboxed in the sense that my main pages are not ranking but the tags for these pages are ranking and are ranking bad( after 10 pages)

 

[thegame95]

i think if your site is sandbox for real then there isnt much you can do ..maybe add backlinks to get it out of sandbox quicker..but many times the site isnt sandbox and its just little google dance.

 

[googlemonster]

Not sure I haven't tested that theory. In theory it can't be deindexed, because in theory you can do the same thing to a competitors site. My notion is that the majority of seos won't bother, but it needs testing imo. I have a site on my radar which I was going to try to do the same thing to.

 

[volund]

What whatever you want to call it it's some penality or filter that doesnt allow it to rank on the keyterms anymore it seems. For example I ranked on the first page for popcorn movies, now its on page 62 or thereabouts. Were not talking about de indexing just a sandbox or penalty due to link velocity imo.

Here look at the graph from Google:

The odd thing is I see another site with a worse link graph than mine: meaning that most of his links are blog spam, whereas mine are varied, pretty much same age of site. Yet something tumbled me over a cliff.

One thing to keep in mind when looking at a sites links is that you are not seeing all of them. Google shows you next to none and while Yahoo shows more of them and can give you a good indication of how many links a site has in General, the links you see in Yahoo do not really mean anything at all when it comes to ranking in Google. One site I am working on now has over 6k Google indexed links as of last weekend and shows 3300 in Yahoo and 26 in Google.

Why does it have to be a penalty? Just because you do not rank well enough to get on the first page does not mean that Google is somehow singling out your site for something you did? There is a huge difference between being punished for breaking the rules and not doing well on a test. It most likely means that your site profile is just not good enough to rank well according to the same algorithm that everyone else is using (ie: not doing well on a test).

You need to test different link building methods and see what works and what does not work. Take what does work and replicate and add to it so you can do better on your next site.

There are a lot of questions you have to answer when comparing your site to other sites and some of the information is hard to come by for the other sites.

How old is your site?
How many links do you have and how old are they?
How many high PR links do you have?
What has been the pattern of your link building?
How many similar or supporting keywords does your site target?

All of these things are giong to make a difference, you can not just compare the number of links and say "hey I have more links than him I should rank higher" It does not work that way.

For example I have seen some very strong evidence over the last year that Google gives more weight to links as they age. This means that the link you got yesterday will be worth more in Google's eyes six months from now. This gives two advantages to older sites, the actual age of the domain and the fact that they probably have a lot of older links. If you think about it, older links should be worth more. A long term stable 3 year old link is a much stronger vote for your site than some link that is deleted after a couple of weeks just to be replaced by another one.

Seriously there is no spoon.

 

[googlemonster]

Dude can't you see a huge drop?

Also google shows a lot in webmaster tools, it is showing 20k +

 

[fire_on_eyes]

Do some blog commenting on high PR blog.....ping them.........and see the result less then one week....

 

[volund]

Dude can't you see a huge drop?

Also google shows a lot in webmaster tools, it is showing 20k +

I do see the big drop but your drop in visitors is not a cause it is a result. You dropped off the first page so of course your traffic dropped. What I am saying is that looking at the drop in rankings as some penalty that Google applied to just you is limiting your thinking to "how can I get out of trouble". Instead you need to be thinking " How can I understand Google's algorithm better"

While the number of links is of course very important, it is not the only thing to think about. I listed some of them but there are others as well. All of these are factored into the algorithm that applies to all the sites that Google ranks. It is not just singling you out for punishment because you built too many links one day.

 

[Kumakamilion]

Hello sandbox, after using xrumer, before i did have 3 quality pr5 links from the same niche / content. Several.edu and other blog commenting and other good backlinks from several sites. Had good ranks with all my blog posts(over 350 posts). Now, good keyword combinations gone from google, was before at page 1. some other keys was page 1 now 145 and so on. Look at my stats:

img189.imageshack.us/img189/4051/xrumer.gif

 

[madhatter$]

Seriously there is no spoon.

Agreed.

 

[seojam]

I agree as well!