Day 0 Experiment: Flooding Google With a Topical Authority Cluster

[Torel]

Case Study -> Day 0​

Will a aggresive Topical Authority strategy work with a brand new site?​

The website is about "topical authority" where some sites like Ahrefs and Sumrush dominate, so probably the competition is pretty high.
Site age is brand new ....
Site has Core SEO metadata (meta tags, OG tags, and Schema) is in place on every public page.
What the site launched with:

• 1 root-hub -> /guides/topical-authory
• 1 complete topical pillar -> /guides/topical-authority/definition
• ~25 articles planned and published using our own Topical Authority workflow
• Content generated and structured using TopicalHQ - AI tools ( The site itself is basically a SEO platform where u can generate Topical Authority sitemaps, do keyword research and create articles with AI)
• Full internal linking based on topical maps (not isolated articles)

For context each Root Hub page will link to each Pillar Page, and each Pillar Page will link back to the Root Hub Page and to 25 Articles and the Articles will each have 7 links in them ... 5-6 links to Articles in the same Pillar, one link to the Pillar itself and maybe 1 link Cross Pillars.
I've asked chat gpt to make a image so you guys can understand better but it seems it's kidda stupid so I had to do it myself



The strategy I'll be using is a Topical Authority BURST strategy where I will push 1 Pillar with 25 Articles each week for the first month, then I will increase to 2 Pillars / Week so that's about 50 Articles per week, that way I hope google will push me faster, you would wonder why and here is the answer:

When you publish one article, Google sees:

• an isolated document
• weak topical confidence
• little context

When you publish 25 interlinked articles in the same topic, Google sees:

• a topic graph
• consistent entities, terminology, intent
• clear topical boundaries

That lets Google answer faster:

“Is this site about X, or just touching X once?”

Answering that faster = faster trust.

Batch publishing creates immediate internal reinforcement
Publishing 25 articles at once does three things immediately:

• Internal links exist from day one
• Pillar ↔ article relationships are visible instantly
• Semantic overlap appears simultaneously, not over months

So instead of:

Page A → waits

Page B → waits

Page C → waits

Google gets:

“Oh. This whole section is about this topic.”

Hope this makes sense.

Technical setup:
- I've created Google Search Console account and submitted the sitemap.xml to it.
- I've created a LinkedIn account and a short intro post
- I've created a Facebook account and a short intro post
- I've created X (Twitter) account and of course a short intro post
- I've also created an YouTube account, planning to make some videos, but for now haven't used it yet.

No campaigns, no ads — just letting the site exist and be discovered.

From here, the plan is simple:

• monitor indexing
• observe crawl behavior
• iterate on content and structure
• document what actually happens

The site was indexed already with 10 pages as of 12 Jan 2026, that's pretty sweet, google indexed it very fast, since the site is brand new.



We’ll continue posting updates as things evolve — good or bad.

 

[Torel]

An quick update on this, I've added several free SEO tools:
Meta Tag Analyzer
Keyword Density
Heading Analyzer
Image Alt Analyzer
Page Speed Insights
Broken Link Checker
Canonical Checker
Robots.txt Generator
Word Counter
Free Tools
Readability Analyzer
Domain Authority
Spam Score Analyzer
Backlink Overview
Domain Comparison
Link Quality Grader
Link Health Monitor
Trending Topics
Keyword Expander

and today and I've noticed that google already indexed all my pages, though in Google Search Console it's still showing only 16 pages indexed, if I search in google site:mysite I see about 90 to 100 pages

 

[Sawyerbroach]

Cool idea, curious to see how fast Google picks it up.

 

[Torel]

Cool idea, curious to see how fast Google picks it up.

Yea for now google picked up all pages ... and today I've posted the second pillar in the topical Authority map.... traffic is not great yet about 10 visits from google for now ... but it's been just a week.

We will see how this develops.

 

[FriendlyFace]

thank you for sharing looks fascinating

 

[Torel]

quick update on the site.

we have pushed the 2rd pillar live. sticking strictly to the map we generated.

so far google is eating up the structure. indexing is still fast and the interlinking between the first two pillars is starting to show some movement. we're are aiming for 7 pillars total.

no backlinks yet, just pure on-page and structure. will update again when we drop pillar 3.

 

[Torel]

Quick update. Pillar #3 is now live. Same approach as before: strict adherence to the topical map, no random articles, no filler. At this point the site has 3 pillars online, roughly 75 supporting articles total, all interlinked from day one (pillar ↔ articles ↔ light cross-pillar where it actually makes sense). Still zero backlinks, zero outreach, zero ads.

What’s interesting is how Google is reacting.

Indexing is happening fast. New pillar pages are getting indexed within hours, and the supporting articles usually the same day or the next. Google Search Console is clearly lagging behind reality — a site: query shows far more URLs indexed than GSC reports. That alone tells me the structure + internal linking is enough for discovery, even on a brand new domain.

Crawl behavior is also changing. Google isn’t just touching the pillar URLs anymore. It’s going deeper, following article-to-article paths inside the same pillar. That’s an important shift. It suggests Google already sees each pillar as a topic section, not as isolated pages floating around.

Traffic-wise, nothing impressive yet — and that’s expected. We’re talking single digits to low double digits per day. At this stage, traffic honestly doesn’t matter. What matters is crawl consistency and indexing speed. That’s where trust starts, not with clicks.
But just to have some reference here is an image of the current traffic:


I also want to add some early usage context, because this isn’t just “indexed pages sitting there”.

Over the last 30 days the site recorded around 600+ sessions from ~200 unique visitors, all organic/discovery-based. Almost 90% of users are on desktop, ~74% on Chrome, very little mobile or tablet usage. That’s exactly the audience you’d expect for a technical SEO / tooling site, not casual browsing. People are landing inside pillars and articles, not just the homepage, which is another good sign.

Important clarification: this is not a “spam AI content and pray” experiment.

The hypothesis is very narrow and very specific: can aggressive topical completeness compensate for zero backlinks, zero domain age, and a highly competitive niche — at least at the crawl, indexing, and early trust layer?

So far, the answer looks like yes, at least on the infrastructure side of trust.

 

[Torel]

Wow so much information, really impressive. Good luck in your journey. Be patient and everything will be okay

Yep will keep adding more I'm about to post like that 4-th pillar tomorrow and the unique visits increased like a lot they are about 995 visits in this moment.

 

[Torel]

quick update. pillar #4 is now live. same process, same discipline. one pillar, full article set, strict topical map, no random content added just to “increase pages”.

at this point the structure is getting pretty dense:
- 4 pillars live
- ~100+ supporting articles total
- all interlinked from day one (pillar ↔ articles, light cross-pillar where it actually makes sense)
- still zero backlinks, zero outreach, zero ads

traffic update:
we just crossed 1230 total visits to date. growth isn’t linear, but it’s clearly accelerating as more topical sections go live. most traffic is still landing directly on articles and pillar pages, not the homepage, which is exactly what i want to see.



indexing + crawl:
google is now consistently crawling deeper paths. not just pillar → article, but article → article inside the same pillar. gsc is still behind compared to site: queries, but that gap has been consistent since pillar #2, so i’m not worried about it.

important part for me:
this is starting to look less like “a new site with content” and more like “a site with defined topic sections”. that shift seems to happen only after multiple pillars are live, not after just one.

still no links, still no external push. the experiment stays the same:
can aggressive topical completeness + structure build early trust without authority signals?

next step:
we’ll keep pushing. plan is to reach 7 pillars total before doing anything off-page, if at all. i’ll update again after pillar #5 or if something interesting breaks before that.

will keep documenting everything, good or bad.

 

[Torel]

It's fascinating to see how Google is reacting to the site's structure and internal linking, and the fact that they're indexing new pillar pages within hours is a great sign. I'm curious to know, have you noticed any changes in the site's keyword rankings or are you tracking any specific keywords to monitor the site's progress? The approach of sticking strictly to the topical map and avoiding random articles is really interesting, and I'd love to hear more about how you're determining the supporting articles for each pillar. Are you using any specific tools or techniques to ensure that the articles are relevant and useful to users?

good questions!
right now I'm not chasing individual keywords on purpose. early on, rankings jump around too much to be meaningful. the main things we’re watching are:
- how fast new urls get indexed
- how deep google crawls inside a pillar
- whether impressions start appearing across many related queries instead of one head term

that tells us more about trust and topical understanding than a single rank position

for supporting articles, everything comes from a topical map, not “keyword lists”. we break the pillar topic into entities, sub-entities, comparisons, problems, and decision angles, then make sure each article answers a specific intent inside that graph. I'm using my own tools in topicalhq ... search it on google, it can create a topical map ... articles and so on, if you decide to play with it let me know your username and I'll give you some credits to play with.

once impressions stabilize and patterns emerge, then I'll start tracking.

 

[Danilo26336]

What plugin you use to check the analytics data?

 

[Torel]

What plugin you use to check the analytics data?

I'm not using any plugin, it's custom made with react / next js

 

[Elon Snup]

Interesting approach - launching with 25 articles + free tools to build topical authority from day one. The tools strategy is smart for generating natural backlinks and diversifying your indexed page types.

Few observations:

1. The GSC vs site: discrepancy is normal for new sites. GSC takes a few days to catch up with what's actually indexed.

2. Targeting "topical authority" as a niche is meta but also competitive since Ahrefs/Semrush own most of those keywords. Your edge will need to come from practical experiments like this one.

3. The free tools play is underrated - those pages often rank faster than content because they satisfy search intent differently.

What's your link building strategy beyond the tools attracting natural links? And are you tracking rankings on specific keywords yet or just indexation at this stage?

 

[Marco69]

Quick update. Pillar #3 is now live. Same approach as before: strict adherence to the topical map, no random articles, no filler. At this point the site has 3 pillars online, roughly 75 supporting articles total, all interlinked from day one (pillar ↔ articles ↔ light cross-pillar where it actually makes sense). Still zero backlinks, zero outreach, zero ads.

What’s interesting is how Google is reacting.

Indexing is happening fast. New pillar pages are getting indexed within hours, and the supporting articles usually the same day or the next. Google Search Console is clearly lagging behind reality — a site: query shows far more URLs indexed than GSC reports. That alone tells me the structure + internal linking is enough for discovery, even on a brand new domain.

Crawl behavior is also changing. Google isn’t just touching the pillar URLs anymore. It’s going deeper, following article-to-article paths inside the same pillar. That’s an important shift. It suggests Google already sees each pillar as a topic section, not as isolated pages floating around.

Traffic-wise, nothing impressive yet — and that’s expected. We’re talking single digits to low double digits per day. At this stage, traffic honestly doesn’t matter. What matters is crawl consistency and indexing speed. That’s where trust starts, not with clicks.
But just to have some reference here is an image of the current traffic:
View attachment 503384

I also want to add some early usage context, because this isn’t just “indexed pages sitting there”.

Over the last 30 days the site recorded around 600+ sessions from ~200 unique visitors, all organic/discovery-based. Almost 90% of users are on desktop, ~74% on Chrome, very little mobile or tablet usage. That’s exactly the audience you’d expect for a technical SEO / tooling site, not casual browsing. People are landing inside pillars and articles, not just the homepage, which is another good sign.

Important clarification: this is not a “spam AI content and pray” experiment.

The hypothesis is very narrow and very specific: can aggressive topical completeness compensate for zero backlinks, zero domain age, and a highly competitive niche — at least at the crawl, indexing, and early trust layer?

So far, the answer looks like yes, at least on the infrastructure side of trust.

Important clarification: this is not a “spam AI content and pray” experiment.

So then when it's not AI so how do you write 25 articles for 1 pillar each week, yout have 3 pillars that means you write 75 articles every week without AI ? Your graphic structur of your root hub is interesting , you dominate google first page and getting only organic 212 visitors to your site ? Does this not make you critical thinking ?

My view is yes this strategy is interesting , but finding a phrase fo rmultiple keywords from one niche, then use a site title and domain name who is not registered/ conquered in the serps - then you will dominate a category you are the category king, a category who is not conquered by the big media news sites, this will bring much more traffic.

Wish you all the best !

 

[Torel]

Interesting approach - launching with 25 articles + free tools to build topical authority from day one. The tools strategy is smart for generating natural backlinks and diversifying your indexed page types.

Few observations:

1. The GSC vs site: discrepancy is normal for new sites. GSC takes a few days to catch up with what's actually indexed.

2. Targeting "topical authority" as a niche is meta but also competitive since Ahrefs/Semrush own most of those keywords. Your edge will need to come from practical experiments like this one.

3. The free tools play is underrated - those pages often rank faster than content because they satisfy search intent differently.

What's your link building strategy beyond the tools attracting natural links? And are you tracking rankings on specific keywords yet or just indexation at this stage?

Yes topical authority as the root hub, I know it's kidda hard to rank, but I'll give it a try. You are right about the free tools they tend to attract links.

I'm not link building yet, I wanna see for the first 2 months where I can go without links, well I did some links like big sites like FaceBook, Youtube, LinkedIn, Twitter, DEV-to Community, G2, Medium, Crunchbase ... so I have about 10 external links.

I'm tracking for "topical authority" but I'm not in top 100 yet, and I think I've made a mistake in the first 3 weeks anyway, I don't think that I linked backed to root-hub from the pillar pages, I will have to rectify that.

Important clarification: this is not a “spam AI content and pray” experiment.

So then when it's not AI so how do you write 25 articles for 1 pillar each week, yout have 3 pillars that means you write 75 articles every week without AI ? Your graphic structur of your root hub is interesting , you dominate google first page and getting only organic 212 visitors to your site ? Does this not make you critical thinking ?

My view is yes this strategy is interesting , but finding a phrase fo rmultiple keywords from one niche, then use a site title and domain name who is not registered/ conquered in the serps - then you will dominate a category you are the category king, a category who is not conquered by the big media news sites, this will bring much more traffic.

Wish you all the best !

No ... I didn't not say that I won't make the articles with AI, I mean they are AI articles but they are not fluff. Like I do AAT and EEAT checks on the articles, I make the articles ready quotes by LLMs and so on, but yea... the articles are build 100% with AI

And another clarification, I'm not dominating google first page at all at the moment That's the goal, the site is brand new.
Thanks for the wishes

 

[Elon Snup]

Interesting experiment. The aggressive content clustering approach makes sense - Google seems to reward topical depth when the internal structure is solid.

Curious about a few things: are you using AI for the bulk content or keeping it manual? And how are you handling the internal linking at scale - automated based on your map or manual placement?

The free tools angle is smart for attracting natural links too. Will follow along.

 

[Marco69]

My personal 5 cents are; design a new category and dominate it in the google serps is a better way ...... a category which is not conquered by big sites who dominate google.

The catch here is, wehn you try to build topical authority on a topic that is conquered by big sites and big media news sites you will not have a chance to rank, yeah you will gain followers (or quickly) for that topic on social media and you can make money with them, but only when you know that smm game, to getting new followers quickly every month organical.

Happy Day

 

[Torel]

Interesting experiment. The aggressive content clustering approach makes sense - Google seems to reward topical depth when the internal structure is solid.

Curious about a few things: are you using AI for the bulk content or keeping it manual? And how are you handling the internal linking at scale - automated based on your map or manual placement?

The free tools angle is smart for attracting natural links too. Will follow along.

Yes I'm using AI for content but the articles are made very smart, like checked with EEAT and AAT and they are made to rank in LLMs too. First of all I build a topical map with internal linking already there. So basically everything is automated. For me an article looks something like this before it done:



So basically I have secondary keywords, semantic terms and links to pillars and links to sibiling articles, sometimes links to other content in other pillars or link to money page, then I feed this info to the AI and write a TOC for the article then again I write that article paragraph by paragraph, but yea this is what's happening behind the scenes when you I press that generate article button

My personal 5 cents are; design a new category and dominate it in the google serps is a better way ...... a category which is not conquered by big sites who dominate google.

The catch here is, wehn you try to build topical authority on a topic that is conquered by big sites and big media news sites you will not have a chance to rank, yeah you will gain followers (or quickly) for that topic on social media and you can make money with them, but only when you know that smm game, to getting new followers quickly every month organical.

Happy Day

agree with the idea, but i’d add one nuance. it’s not about new category vs big category, it’s about how narrow your entry point is.

big sites don’t “own” topics, they own broad interpretations of them. if you enter at the same abstraction level, you lose. if you enter one layer deeper (specific angle, use case, constraint, or audience), you can still build topical authority and expand outward later.

we’re seeing that google rewards tight topical graphs first, not brand size. dominance comes from covering a slice completely, then growing the perimeter.

so yes — avoid head terms early. but you don’t need a brand-new category. you need a clearly bounded one.

happy day

 

[Marco69]

Yes I'm using AI for content but the articles are made very smart, like checked with EEAT and AAT and they are made to rank in LLMs too. First of all I build a topical map with internal linking already there. So basically everything is automated. For me an article looks something like this before it done:

View attachment 505788

So basically I have secondary keywords, semantic terms and links to pillars and links to sibiling articles, sometimes links to other content in other pillars or link to money page, then I feed this info to the AI and write a TOC for the article then again I write that article paragraph by paragraph, but yea this is what's happening behind the scenes when you I press that generate article button



agree with the idea, but i’d add one nuance. it’s not about new category vs big category, it’s about how narrow your entry point is.

big sites don’t “own” topics, they own broad interpretations of them. if you enter at the same abstraction level, you lose. if you enter one layer deeper (specific angle, use case, constraint, or audience), you can still build topical authority and expand outward later.

we’re seeing that google rewards tight topical graphs first, not brand size. dominance comes from covering a slice completely, then growing the perimeter.

so yes — avoid head terms early. but you don’t need a brand-new category. you need a clearly bounded one.

happy day

Yes I'm using AI for content but the articles are made very smart, like checked with EEAT and AAT and they are made to rank in LLMs too. First of all I build a topical map with internal linking already there. So basically everything is automated. For me an article looks something like this before it done:

View attachment 505788

So basically I have secondary keywords, semantic terms and links to pillars and links to sibiling articles, sometimes links to other content in other pillars or link to money page, then I feed this info to the AI and write a TOC for the article then again I write that article paragraph by paragraph, but yea this is what's happening behind the scenes when you I press that generate article button



agree with the idea, but i’d add one nuance. it’s not about new category vs big category, it’s about how narrow your entry point is.

big sites don’t “own” topics, they own broad interpretations of them. if you enter at the same abstraction level, you lose. if you enter one layer deeper (specific angle, use case, constraint, or audience), you can still build topical authority and expand outward later.

we’re seeing that google rewards tight topical graphs first, not brand size. dominance comes from covering a slice completely, then growing the perimeter.

so yes — avoid head terms early. but you don’t need a brand-new category. you need a clearly bounded one.

happy day

Yes Dude I agree with that deeper topic layer , btw. how do you check EEAT and AAT on AI articles ?
For me it looks like organic grow first (later ads) on social media ; IG and Twitter you will get traffic and growing more quickly than with google organic seo today, but you do it right like these big sites doing, showing up multiple listings in google serps ! With that you dominate google.

 

[Torel]

Yes Dude I agree with that deeper topic layer , btw. how do you check EEAT and AAT on AI articles ?
For me it looks like organic grow first (later ads) on social media ; IG and Twitter you will get traffic and growing more quickly than with google organic seo today, but you do it right like these big sites doing, showing up multiple listings in google serps ! With that you dominate google.

I made some prompts for AI and I feed the articles to AI to check for EEAT and AAT scores