Why Does Bad Spinning Work?

Why Does Bad Spinning Work?


I spin manually with 3 different spinners. Each has it's own strengths. I write independent paragraphs, rewrite them, rewrite each sentence and then manually select word/ phrases from the suggestions. The paragraphs are then randomly assembled into articles.


The articles work very well but then I see spun crap working well too. Here's 3 things I can't figure out.


Why Can't G00gle See 3 Word Combinations


I have bought 32 custom articles spun at the sentence level 6-9 times. They work for SEO. Copyscape can see 3 word combinations as duplicate, why can't G00gle. When you G00gle a title in quotes from one of Vita Vee's Ultra Spinnable articles, you get a tremendous amount of results. Yet those articles must be working because a lot of people are paying a lot for them every month.


Why Can't G00gle Recognize Bad Grammar


What really kills me is auto-spun content. MicroSoft Word's grammar checker can easily spot all the mistakes that are created. Why can't Google recognize it as spun gibberish and treat it accordingly? I do not have personal experience with this but I assume it is effective because so many people are still doing it.


Why Can't G00gle Realize When Words Aren't Even Words


Google is all about words and their relevance and relationship. But now there is a trend in spinning to use software that replaced letters with html symbols that make the page up to 100 percent unique. On the screen the words look complete but are actually missing letters. It seems like G00gle would notice a lack of real words on that page.


I tell myself I should keep doing my super spinning because one day there will be a G00gle Crap Content update. But right now I sometime wonder if it is worth it. In fact there is a Senuke "Guru" that recommends not spinning at all, just use the same article for the whole nuke.


Does anyone want to share an opinion on this? I'd like to hear about anyones success or lack of it using spinners and spinning. Maybe some more efficient strategies can be developed.

Great questions, I have no idea but don't you think that google has a plan and just hasn't started to implement it.

They don't need to. Just leave it alone google. Don't try to detect bad spinned articles.

If posting spun content to web 2.0 with a backlink to my money site will increase my ranking, I don't care if google see spun content or not

There was a topic few months ago about google and how it reads the content but I don't remember it's title, try to do some searches here

in b4 expertpeon


I think it's because a link is a link, there is also a thing called curation... where it's all about listing duplicate content but adding duplicate content together in such a way to create a good user experience. I don't know man, A link is a link is a link.

Just more evidence that people who spin the unique, readable content myth are full of shit and don't know what they're talking about. I use crap generated (not even spun, randomly generated from sentence fragments) content and I've never seen any Panda-like hit on my sites. My content generation time is precisely zero.

Don't ask why, just be happy that G will accept virtually any old shit and keep on cranking it out. Less time spent mucking around with content is more time that can be spent on link generation (which is the important part). If and when the algo gets tightened up then I'll change it up but until then it's spam spam spam.

If I had to speculate "why" it would be that grammatical correctness is actually a reasonably hard topic. As an English graduate I can say that the MS Word grammar correction is frequently off, and also grammatical correctness is not always correlated with how useful something is for the target audience. Say someone is looking for some tips for Modern Warfare... The answer will probably be in an extremely badly written forum post that's full of slang and weird abbreviations, but if it contains the answer the searcher is looking for then that is the page G should be serving up.

Grammatical metrics are probably better suited to serving up content of a reading level appropriate to the query rather than testing for "quality," but those metrics are easily gamed by keeping your sentences short and using minimal punctuation.

Real "meaning" (ie. deciding whether a grammatically correct sentence is meaningful or nonsense) is virtually impossible to do in an automated way. Even IBM Watson-style AI supercomputers have trouble with this task.

Right now a link is a link. I guess I just a little jumpy because my main site lost 75% of it's traffic instantly in October. Right when I paid for linking with poorly spun content. My bad, I should have read what the service was offering.

I did an experiment with an article spun on the paragraph and sentence level for a low very low competition keyword. I got the article ranked several times in the top 30.

I think that G00gle will eventually crack down on poorly spun content. BUT I think there is a point where G00gle can't see it. I have spun content extremely well and checked it and it was around 80% unique. Using DupeCop comparing 16 spins.

Then I did a whole lot more spinning and it was still about the same level of uniqueness. I think you can spin it so well that the similarity is just that it is in the same language and maybe on the same topic.

I think G00gle is limited in its ability to detect duplicate content. I think if you spin every other word gramatically correct wih a lot of interchangable paragraphs it will not be able to detect it even in future updates.

That's what I'm betting on anyway.