Google Fred Recovery Tips
- Thread starter cheva
- Start date
Wilson Grant Fisk
Elite Member
- Nov 10, 2012
- 15,677
- 46,846
OP can you post a link to the original article, the closet one I found was this:
http://nulledpk.com/google-fred-update-recovery-tips/
http://nulledpk.com/google-fred-update-recovery-tips/
cheva
Power Member
- Aug 22, 2009
- 557
- 761
OP can you post a link to the original article, the closet one I found was this:
http://nulledpk.com/google-fred-update-recovery-tips/
thats it man i was prowling for udemy courses
THUNDERELVI
Elite Member
- Sep 12, 2009
- 2,551
- 2,305
No it doesn't, not directly at least. People confuse content length with topical relevance and keyword density, that's what matters! I can't believe how many posts I've read which claim that the longer the content, the better your rankings... Is it true?! Yes, in most cases.
Is it because of content length? No.
The idea behind topical relevance is that the more relevant your article is about your topic/keywords, the better your rankings will be. Now, this is 2009 news, but most people have no idea how to increase this relevance to the max. without keyword stuffing even in 2017. And increasing the topical relevance correlates with increasing the word count, a.k.a article length and when you think about it, it's completely logical and makes perfect sense, because you can't really explain everything possible about a certain topic in 500 words, unless the topic is very very narrow and your main keyword(s) are long tails.
You need ~ 200 words just for the article intro and you just used 40% of the total nr. of words, so of course you are gonna need way more words to properly explain your topic in thorough details and increase the relevance. And yet, most people around the forums mention the 500 word count like it's some magical number embedded in the algorithm.
Don't get me wrong, there are cases where you can use 500-600 words successfully to rank in good SERP positions just with on-page SEO alone, but if you are targeting mid to high competition $$$ keywords, this won't be the case in 99% of the cases. Also, just to clarify: I'm talking about money-site articles, not web 2.0 ones or generally backlinking articles, although the logic is the same for those as well but it gets more complicated, so won't really go into details about that here.
I will just mention 1 method of increasing topical relevance which everyone knows anyway and everyone can clearly see how it directly correlates with increasing your word count - naturally inserting as many long tails & LSI keywords as possible in your article.
Last but not least, keyword density... now this is a controversial subject here in BHW, but if you do pay attention to keyword density and you wanna keep it in safe levels (which are different for everybody, mine are approx. the same as phpbuilt's in most niches I target), then you need to write more words in order to compensate for using the keywords more times - this way, you keep those percentages in check for the SE-s and also you don't come out as a shitty writer for repeating yourself the same keyword 10 times in 100 words.
Do you know why those gigantic 3k-5k word articles rank for hundreds of keywords with as little as 0-20 backlinks on a fresh website (fresh as in with no authority already)? It's because whoever wrote them is very good at keyword research and writing true SEO-optimized articles, not because he wrote 5k words instead of 500. If you don't believe me, take a 500 word article and fluff it up with shit until it reaches 3k or something like that and see what happens with your rankings.. Also, some people do the above without even knowing it - they write awesome long articles and they naturally insert LSI keywords, long tails, etc... but it's easier if you know what you are doing of course.
Bottom line: it's NOT the keyword count that matters, it's some other factors that directly correlate with an increased keyword count and hence, increased rankings!
P.S. Been away from BHW for quite some time and your recent thread about PBN-s was among the first threads I read on the feed when I opened the site!!
aidenhera
BANNED
- Nov 30, 2016
- 3,059
- 915
matt claimed long ago code validation doesnt help with seo.
"quality comments on the website"
wut. how are quality comments any different from quality article. text is text
"make sure ur content is easy to understand"
not really, readibility % in english (and only in english) maybe matters but its very small influence. put autism but unique content and rank.
also that "google fred" dance is still going on, so i dont see how u came to these assumptions.
"quality comments on the website"
wut. how are quality comments any different from quality article. text is text
"make sure ur content is easy to understand"
not really, readibility % in english (and only in english) maybe matters but its very small influence. put autism but unique content and rank.
also that "google fred" dance is still going on, so i dont see how u came to these assumptions.
Arrashisure
BANNED
- Dec 15, 2011
- 52
- 2
Whats google fred new google update? i have been living under a rock.
cheva
Power Member
- Aug 22, 2009
- 557
- 761
I didnt come up with them man at least read the thread. And code validation may not directly help with ranking but code validation can show if your website is broken which may not be visible to you
aidenhera
BANNED
- Nov 30, 2016
- 3,059
- 915
probably about 95% of websites on the internet dont pass code validation or even more by the way. wordpress doesnt pass code validation, phpbb doesnt, ipbs doesnt etc etc. so why spread false positives
- May 10, 2012
- 9,539
- 7,559
No it doesn't, not directly at least. People confuse content length with topical relevance and keyword density, that's what matters! I can't believe how many posts I've read which claim that the longer the content, the better your rankings... Is it true?! Yes, in most cases.
Is it because of content length? No.
The idea behind topical relevance is that the more relevant your article is about your topic/keywords, the better your rankings will be. Now, this is 2009 news, but most people have no idea how to increase this relevance to the max. without keyword stuffing even in 2017. And increasing the topical relevance correlates with increasing the word count, a.k.a article length and when you think about it, it's completely logical and makes perfect sense, because you can't really explain everything possible about a certain topic in 500 words, unless the topic is very very narrow and your main keyword(s) are long tails.
You need ~ 200 words just for the article intro and you just used 40% of the total nr. of words, so of course you are gonna need way more words to properly explain your topic in thorough details and increase the relevance. And yet, most people around the forums mention the 500 word count like it's some magical number embedded in the algorithm.
Don't get me wrong, there are cases where you can use 500-600 words successfully to rank in good SERP positions just with on-page SEO alone, but if you are targeting mid to high competition $$$ keywords, this won't be the case in 99% of the cases. Also, just to clarify: I'm talking about money-site articles, not web 2.0 ones or generally backlinking articles, although the logic is the same for those as well but it gets more complicated, so won't really go into details about that here.
I will just mention 1 method of increasing topical relevance which everyone knows anyway and everyone can clearly see how it directly correlates with increasing your word count - naturally inserting as many long tails & LSI keywords as possible in your article.
Last but not least, keyword density... now this is a controversial subject here in BHW, but if you do pay attention to keyword density and you wanna keep it in safe levels (which are different for everybody, mine are approx. the same as phpbuilt's in most niches I target), then you need to write more words in order to compensate for using the keywords more times - this way, you keep those percentages in check for the SE-s and also you don't come out as a shitty writer for repeating yourself the same keyword 10 times in 100 words.
Do you know why those gigantic 3k-5k word articles rank for hundreds of keywords with as little as 0-20 backlinks on a fresh website (fresh as in with no authority already)? It's because whoever wrote them is very good at keyword research and writing true SEO-optimized articles, not because he wrote 5k words instead of 500. If you don't believe me, take a 500 word article and fluff it up with shit until it reaches 3k or something like that and see what happens with your rankings.. Also, some people do the above without even knowing it - they write awesome long articles and they naturally insert LSI keywords, long tails, etc... but it's easier if you know what you are doing of course.
Bottom line: it's NOT the keyword count that matters, it's some other factors that directly correlate with an increased keyword count and hence, increased rankings!
P.S. Been away from BHW for quite some time and your recent thread about PBN-s was among the first threads I read on the feed when I opened the site!!
I 100% agree with this. I've been using Phpbuilt's guide ever since it came out and it's been pure gold. Haven't seen the guy online for a while, but I really hope he is well, one of the most informative and thorough guides I've ever read here. And the keyword density is going hand in hand with everything, just as you said. Google's algorithm to determine the relevancy of the page is becoming smarter and smarter and that's why I also believe, that pushing it with exact/partial anchors is really unnecessary and can lead only to trouble really. Google knows very well what the site/page is a bout. But that's a bit off topic.
All in all, I can only agree and I've been doing this for a few years now and it's been working great. Sometimes it's tad hard to work with precise keyword densities, because Google now works with synonyms and all, but it can be done. And of course, the longer the article, the more space for maneuvering with keywords and thus relevancy. But I am just repeating what you said basically.
And hope you liked that rant-ish article of mine.
THUNDERELVI
Elite Member
- Sep 12, 2009
- 2,551
- 2,305
I 100% agree with this. I've been using Phpbuilt's guide ever since it came out and it's been pure gold. Haven't seen the guy online for a while, but I really hope he is well, one of the most informative and thorough guides I've ever read here. And the keyword density is going hand in hand with everything, just as you said. Google's algorithm to determine the relevancy of the page is becoming smarter and smarter and that's why I also believe, that pushing it with exact/partial anchors is really unnecessary and can lead only to trouble really. Google knows very well what the site/page is a bout. But that's a bit off topic.
All in all, I can only agree and I've been doing this for a few years now and it's been working great. Sometimes it's tad hard to work with precise keyword densities, because Google now works with synonyms and all, but it can be done. And of course, the longer the article, the more space for maneuvering with keywords and thus relevancy. But I am just repeating what you said basically.
And hope you liked that rant-ish article of mine.
Yep, I basically starting paying attention to keyword density after I read his authority guide and been doing that ever since. His approach on internal backlinks also drastically changed the way I write articles now (wasn't inter-linking as much as I should have and was missing out on a lot of 'free' rankings). Speaking of that, internal backlinks is another factor that correlates with an increased word count, because the more you link out to other related articles in your silo/site, the more words you need.
Coming back to keyword density, I use his numbers as a starting point, analyze the front page competitors' % ranges, do the same analysis for related keywords (so I know the average for that niche) and then after calculating an average, I go with that - been working well so far. In the majority of cases, his numbers match the ones in the SERP-s (with some +/- differences of course). In some other cases, the figures are off by 2-3% and then of course, as with everything in SEO, there are exceptions of sites ranking with very high keyword density. But as he thoroughly explained it, this happens because of the huge authority/trust these sites have, which again matched most of my findings.
This still works in 2017 and will sure as hell work for the foreseeable future as well. If only people followed these advices (which is 50-80% of the ranking work and costs nothing other than time) and stopped posting shit in the forums every time Google farts an "end of the world update", we would save BHW so much bandwidth lol...
Regarding your thread, I loved it, everything in it was true. I will admit there was nothing new to me, but that thread should be a sticky to newcomers, so they know what they are getting into if they are thinking of trying PBN-s as a ranking method and set their expectations right. Oh and you made me laugh hard with the backlink reset thing - seems like every few months in BHW, there is a new BS term invented
Jon Bon Johnny
Newbie
- Mar 6, 2017
- 19
- 3
- May 10, 2012
- 9,539
- 7,559
Yep, I basically starting paying attention to keyword density after I read his authority guide and been doing that ever since. His approach on internal backlinks also drastically changed the way I write articles now (wasn't inter-linking as much as I should have and was missing out on a lot of 'free' rankings). Speaking of that, internal backlinks is another factor that correlates with an increased word count, because the more you link out to other related articles in your silo/site, the more words you need.
Coming back to keyword density, I use his numbers as a starting point, analyze the front page competitors' % ranges, do the same analysis for related keywords (so I know the average for that niche) and then after calculating an average, I go with that - been working well so far. In the majority of cases, his numbers match the ones in the SERP-s (with some +/- differences of course). In some other cases, the figures are off by 2-3% and then of course, as with everything in SEO, there are exceptions of sites ranking with very high keyword density. But as he thoroughly explained it, this happens because of the huge authority/trust these sites have, which again matched most of my findings.
This still works in 2017 and will sure as hell work for the foreseeable future as well. If only people followed these advices (which is 50-80% of the ranking work and costs nothing other than time) and stopped posting shit in the forums every time Google farts an "end of the world update", we would save BHW so much bandwidth lol...
Regarding your thread, I loved it, everything in it was true. I will admit there was nothing new to me, but that thread should be a sticky to newcomers, so they know what they are getting into if they are thinking of trying PBN-s as a ranking method and set their expectations right. Oh and you made me laugh hard with the backlink reset thing - seems like every few months in BHW, there is a new BS term invented
Agreed once again. Though I don't really check the competition too much, but instead, improve the densities until I feel like my rankings are the best. Competition may simply have the strongest offsite SEO and the onsite could be better, so thus this approach. And sure, we are talking about non spammed niches. We would not only save BHW some bandwidth, but I would have a regular pressure and 20% less grey hair.
Ofc. And I am glad you enjoyed the reading, though having that rant as sticky would be too much I guess.
@Jon Bon Johnny - I believe the URL here on the forum worked and I believe there was an updated one on his website, which is apparently expired - https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/f...de-for-2015-remove-penalties-and-rank.767747/
So the knowledge is lost to the world forever! END OF SEO! Unless of course... archive.org - http://web.archive.org/web/20160309073542/http://seowargames.com/on-page-seo/guide.pdf
Sherb
Ban reason = Abuse of Mods
- Dec 26, 2010
- 1,968
- 18,138
Ha, you eat turds.
MatthewGraham
BANNED
- Oct 6, 2015
- 1,755
- 2,746
TL;DR:
- Do a good job
- Don't do a bad job
grabofdeals
Newbie
- Mar 13, 2017
- 3
- 1
Not even sure its really called Fred, the name looked like a troll from Google.
semsei9311
Junior Member
- Jan 11, 2017
- 135
- 20
Sir, Have you seen improvements after implementing this ? do you have a sample ranking data ?
MrValdemar
Junior Member
- Oct 7, 2013
- 129
- 18
@THUNDERELVI and @Nargil you turned, into the words of the OP, a turd into a diamond of a thread, thanks guys, just one question, the internal links guide you referenced thunderelvi, is it in its entirety on the great guide nargi posted, or is there another source for your knowledge on this particular subject?
you see, Ive been trying hard to know more about internal linking because some of my competitors are ranking with very little off page and not much authority, just using good content, but in some cases not even that, just internal linking.
frankly I know everyone is freaking out with these latests G algos, and I'm too, dont get me wrong, but I look forward to the day SEO consists exclusively on putting only the best content forward and not having to do a lot of laborious linkbuilding to trick the engine. We're closer to that day, and in this future scenario you still will need SEO for the onpage sutff, for the internal linking and for all the organization of the website, so on that regard Im not worried
you see, Ive been trying hard to know more about internal linking because some of my competitors are ranking with very little off page and not much authority, just using good content, but in some cases not even that, just internal linking.
frankly I know everyone is freaking out with these latests G algos, and I'm too, dont get me wrong, but I look forward to the day SEO consists exclusively on putting only the best content forward and not having to do a lot of laborious linkbuilding to trick the engine. We're closer to that day, and in this future scenario you still will need SEO for the onpage sutff, for the internal linking and for all the organization of the website, so on that regard Im not worried
- May 10, 2012
- 9,539
- 7,559
Here is an older thread from the same author - https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/phpbuilts-idiot-proof-guide-to-authority-site-building.631067/
You don't really need anything else. Rules of interlinking have not changed much since then, if at all.
- Oct 31, 2008
- 1,226
- 838
here are my 2 cents
my website has 30 posts with average word count upto 3000+ words per post..yet my website was hit ...so I highly doubt that it has to do something with content
I was on 2nd and 3rd pages for lots of keywords..now all are ranking beyond 8th page or out of 100
p.s.the only stupid thing I remember doing before fred was using an indexing service for my 450 links...
my website has 30 posts with average word count upto 3000+ words per post..yet my website was hit ...so I highly doubt that it has to do something with content
I was on 2nd and 3rd pages for lots of keywords..now all are ranking beyond 8th page or out of 100
p.s.the only stupid thing I remember doing before fred was using an indexing service for my 450 links...