I have been reading and reading through what people have to say. And eventually i realised how to do some high quality backlinks that will probably gain power overtime (because they are fresh like snow) but making them is slow and maintaining as well. These cant be done by software. I know this can be done with pbns = low amount of links, but strong ones. However i wanna give a try to free, fresh links. So, did anyone outranked competitors with much lower amount of backlink than them? And at what number could that start? For example, if its possible to have 10 fresh backlinks that will outrank competitor who has 500 and more weak backlinks? Note bolded words. Weak links + medium site = low average quality of a site = low ranking good links + medium site = better score = better ranking I know that google measures score of all our backlinks, then divides it by number of backlinks. If backlinks are half or little bit spammed we might not get a penalty but we might rank lower as it will result in lower overall site score. this basically tells u need less better links and u can rank better than people with a lot of autogenerated backlinks But it doesn't work this way on low amounts. Of course you need better link score, but if you have only good 10 links, and competitor has 500 weak ones but hes not penalised, he will rank better, even if you have better score. My questions are, if you agree with me, and whats the minimal amount of manually made fresh backlinks (that dont launch any spam filters) that is required to rank on *non competetive niches? I know this is some kind of "longtail question" but this is probably the best way to do backlinks so maybe someone knows * by non competetive i mean 0-10 (out of 100) keyword difficulty on tools like keyword revealer (or semrush/ahrefs) and about 100k-600k of pages found in search results.