Fast Backlinks Vs Slow Quality Backlinks

So I know there is debate but I wanted to get some case studies hopefully in this post. I'm pretty torn on what to do with my websites. I got one website for 22k exact matches up to #2 on google within the last week but that website took over a year of building up the slow way. I also have some newer sites but not sure whether to build up slowly with quality links or to use link velocity and build up with a mix of profile, SB, AMR and such. I have the tools for mass links just not really sure what direction to go into. Can anyone that has done mass backlinks on newer sites under 6 months let us know what your results are? Any opinions on these two ways of getting backlinks?

I am a fan of slow and steady + launching a lot of sites all the time - get your volume through bringing up tons of sites more slowly. It's a more resilient and stable strategy; it's very easy to blow yourself out of the water if you just get out there and start blasting a brand new site.

You can make your site more resilient to direct crap linking if you also seek out links from trusted web 2.0 and social media sites reasonably early in your linking strategy.

My advice would be to build 5-10 quite similar experimental sites and try out different specific backlinking strategies with them to see just how fast you can crank your links. Testing is a way better option than looking for advice on message boards about this kind of thing because everyone's linking methodology is completely different - what one person considers fast may be considered slow by someone else.

"Link velocity" is just a measure of the speed with which you acquire links, ie. you could have fast or slow link velocity.

Ya thanks that's some good advice, I'm feeling to impatient to build up slow but I agree I think it works smoother for sure.