SEO Avalanche Technique - Ranking With No Resources

[DanielS]

OK so here are my results on a 3 month old domain with zero link building.

There are many broad term targeted articles on the site already and as you would expect they are getting zero love from organic search at this early stage. So I decided to test this technique out to see where big G places my site in terms of levels.

I did this by getting my writer to do 5 articles each at different levels of monthly traffic.

The articles were published 15th July and the results as of today are as follows -

TERM	ALLINTITLE RESULTS	MONTHLY VOLUME	KGR	MY RANKING
A	3	70	0.04	5
B	14	590	0.02	NOT RANKED
C	91	210	0.43	1 *featured snippet
D	8	170	0.47	23
E	11	210	0.05	2

I am pleased to hit a featured answer snippet already and from the above table I am going to assume that my KGR boundries at the minute are keywords that have a KGR of 0.04.

Interestingly term B was a URL that I forced into the index via websmaster tools.

All others landed naturally within 24hrs of publishing.

Thoughts?

What do you do for your H2's? I know traditionally the move would be to use secondary keywords/terms as H2's, but I would imagine many people would prefer not to burn through other KGR terms by using them as H2's (at least not for this avalanche strategy). Do you just use whatever relevant keywords/search terms you can find, without worrying about competition for those keywords? Or, do you not use any secondary keywords as H2's and just use headers like "The next step..." etc.

Personally, I've got around 55 KGR terms/0 search volume terms but some overlap. I could write a separate article for each term, but I don't know if this would be best or if I would be better off going the traditional route and using related KGR keywords as H2's.

 

[MrMedia]

I literally give my writer the title which is the KGR phrase and then tell her to come back with 1500 words with the usual formatting.

The title / H1 seems to be enough to do it on very low comp terms.

 

[WinMore]

I literally give my writer the title which is the KGR phrase and then tell her to come back with 1500 words with the usual formatting.

The title / H1 seems to be enough to do it on very low comp terms.

I follow the Yoast guidelines right now, and that seems to work to reach position 6-10.
But I'm reworking older articles every day, improving (currently with Zora, and just new things that I learn).

What do you do for your H2's? I know traditionally the move would be to use secondary keywords/terms as H2's, but I would imagine many people would prefer not to burn through other KGR terms by using them as H2's (at least not for this avalanche strategy). Do you just use whatever relevant keywords/search terms you can find, without worrying about competition for those keywords? Or, do you not use any secondary keywords as H2's and just use headers like "The next step..." etc.

Personally, I've got around 55 KGR terms/0 search volume terms but some overlap. I could write a separate article for each term, but I don't know if this would be best or if I would be better off going the traditional route and using related KGR keywords as H2's.

I write one article per KGR keyword.

If they are similar I interlink, there might be some points that overlap, but in one article it'll go a little deeper. Don't forget that you can link to a specific section of another article. So if the overlap would be too big, just cover the essentials, and link to the subsection of the other article.

Once I'm going for articles with a lot more volume, that can be true pillar posts, I will use these older articles as a base, and cover everything they cover and more. And link from these older articles to this pillar piece.

If all goes well, the pillar piece will replace the older articles for their keywords + some more competitive keywords in the search engines.

Once I have a few pillar pieces I'm planning on creating an article that works as a flowchart. Think of a schoolbook. Intro into the subject + chapters explaining the basics. Then get into the meat of it + chapters, etc.

Then I will have the "guide" to boost the pillar articles (and some smaller articles to temporarily fill in the gaps until they are all pillar), and the smaller articles also boosting the "guide" AND the pillar articles.

And almost EVERYTHING will link to the money pages.

 

[MrMedia]

I notice that Quora is ranking for a lot of my KGRs with only a paragraph or two of text.

It would be an excellent basis for KGR content planning.

Does anyone know of a good Quora question scraper?

Eg. Put in seed keyword and it spits out a list of related questions.

 

[CCarter]

Two more examples of the exact same URLs ranking within the same SERPs - these examples are for the keyword "Giordano's" (Locality: Chicago, Illinois, USA - Mobile device):

URL: https://m.yelp.com/biz/giordanos-chicago-30 holds the #13 and #15 positions:

--

URL: https://www.tripadvisor.com/Restaurant_Review-g35805-d427755-Reviews-Giordano_s-Chicago_Illinois.html holds the #17 and #19 positions:

--

This stuff happens a lot more than people realize. This is a single Top 100 SERP with 2 sets of URLs duplicated within it. Wild.

 

[MrMedia]

I saw at the beginning google always show love but after few weeks the ranks always drop atleast in my case. Can you report after few weeks the rankings?

All the kws in the above table are now position 1-3 and have been for weeks

 

[DanielS]

All the kws in the above table are now position 1-3 and have been for weeks

How long did it take for these keywords to solidify their rankings? I've published about 7 articles and I've had a few land in the 22nd position, but they always drop out within an hour or 2. Mind you, my website has 0 authority so I'm assuming it's way too early to expect an rankings, regardless of the keywords targeted.

 

[MrMedia]

As soon as I published they appeared page one and then bounced around for a few days then stuck after that.

 

[Travelingpizza]

Just posted 10 articles by using this method, 6 landed on page 1 and 4 on page 2. I always forced the indexation with gsc. However, I also notice some wild bouncing around and articles even going out of the top 100 shortly after. Is that standard? Should I not force index for some reason?

 

[CCarter]

You shouldn’t be forcing anything. Did you post the content to social media? People seem to skip that part of the equation. That’s the part that natural gets you indexed.

 

[Travelingpizza]

You shouldn’t be forcing anything. Did you post the content to social media? People seem to skip that part of the equation. That’s the part that natural gets you indexed.

I did not indeed, I simply used gsc for indexation because I was eager to see where I would land.

Noted, no force indexation and post on social media. Thanks a ton for your precious advices.

 

[Ryuzaki]

I did not indeed, I simply used gsc for indexation because I was eager to see where I would land.

Noted, no force indexation and post on social media. Thanks a ton for your precious advices.

If you have your sitemaps submitted in Search Console you don't need to do anything at all for indexation, though social media signals are certainly worth having. With your sitemap submitted the post should be indexed somewhere between immediately for trusted and bigger sites and a couple days for brand new sites.

 

[amru82]

Are you posting each new article to social media platforms?

I don't. Does it make a big difference if: 1) all you post on those platforms is a link to the articles and 2) your social profiles have literally no one knowing about you?

 

[CCarter]

I don't. Does it make a big difference if: 1) all you post on those platforms is a link to the articles and 2) your social profiles have literally no one knowing about you?

It's the most critical component to the SEO Avalanche technique - it's Step #10.

You have to include high traffic volume hashtags to get into the search engine index of those hashtags, therefore get search engine's attention.

Google "#kanyewest" and you see the top results include the Twitter and Instagram hashtag search. If you have a post about Kanye West and an article about Kanye West, you get search engines' interest, *cough* pages indexed *cough* You need to include the high traffic volume hashtag in the social media posts.

It literally nothing to do with followers or following. It's the most important step.

 

[proto]

It's the most critical component to the SEO Avalanche technique - it's Step #10.

You have to include high traffic volume hashtags to get into the search engine index of those hashtags, therefore get search engine's attention.

Google "#kanyewest" and you see the top results include the Twitter and Instagram hashtag search. If you have a post about Kanye West and an article about Kanye West, you get search engines' interest, *cough* pages indexed *cough* You need to include the high traffic volume hashtag in the social media posts.

It literally nothing to do with followers or following. It's the most important step.

Are you using any tools to find hashtags or just manually searching?

 

[Ryuzaki]

Are you using any tools to find hashtags or just manually searching?

Use https://hashtagify.me and type in your main term. It'll pull up the highest trafficked related hashtags. CCarter is saying to use highly trafficked and crawled ones solely for indexing. You don't have to spend more than 10 seconds on this.

I'll also add that if you're using Google Search Console and have submitted your sitemap to them, you don't need to do any of these tricks or games to get indexed. You're going straight to the source. They'll check your sitemap at least daily if not far more frequently and see the new posts and index them.

 

[alwicz]

Use https://hashtagify.me and type in your main term. It'll pull up the highest trafficked related hashtags. CCarter is saying to use highly trafficked and crawled ones solely for indexing. You don't have to spend more than 10 seconds on this.

I'll also add that if you're using Google Search Console and have submitted your sitemap to them, you don't need to do any of these tricks or games to get indexed. You're going straight to the source. They'll check your sitemap at least daily if not far more frequently and see the new posts and index them.

So, you think there is no need to post links to your fresh articles to social media when you use GSC? I've obviously added a sitemap to the GSC, and I ask for indexation manually for every new article because of the latest indexation issues Google has. In that case, I am ready to go? Thanks!

 

[uzz]

Try a term with 0-10 monthly searches. If you rank page 1 for the term, then try a term with 10-20 monthly searches. Basically, work your way up the ladder until you can't climb higher, and stick there until your daily organic views show that you can level-up. Also, I think most posts take time to rank for new websites- I don't think insta-rankings are a thing for new websites (I could be wrong, but my experience has been the same as yours- post ranks and then falls).

I'm getting similar results. Going for 0-10 searches - index sometimes on 1st page, then bounce down the ladder. Have 20+ KGR posts and a newish site (Feb). Some of the posts even have 0 KGR. When I google the keyword higher authority sites come up that cover a broad aspect of the keyword. Not sure if some kind of Sandbox or need better onsite.
Interesting thing is I have around 5k directory pages on the site which have no problem ranking on 1st page/ 1st spot. Different SERP rules for Local vs Affiliate i take it.

 

[Ryuzaki]

Stop Getting Lost in the Minutia

You guys are caught up in a common problem that effects nearly everyone at some point: You're worrying about the minutia. And when you do that, action stops until the problems of the minutia get resolved. And there's usually nothing you can do it resolve it, so you end up tinkering around and getting nothing meaningful done.

Think about these things you guys are talking about:

"Is Google going to index my post or do I have to manually request it and post it to social media?"

Google has probably a trillion posts indexed and indexes millions per day. I promise you, they don't need your help. Submit your site to Search Console and make sure to submit your sitemap. They WILL index your posts if you do this.

Also, most CMS's, especially Wordpress, send out pings to Ping list sites every time you hit publish. Google crawls those lists all day every day. It's part of how they discover new pages on the net.

If you're still having problems getting indexed, then: your content is dog shit, you've noindex'd it or blocked crawling in robots.txt, or you've done something goofy technical SEO to make them reject your site. It's most likely that your content is complete trash.

I hate to say it, but more often than not someone on the forum describes their problem as if it's complex and unique, then you see the site and want to choke them to death for wasting everyone's time and disrespecting you by showing you a completely no-effort website build with spun content that's complete gibberish with no pictures and broken CSS, etc. All while pretending nothing is wrong with their build and that it's an acceptable level of quality and effort.

Also, if you want Google to crawl you more frequently, index you faster, and rank you faster, then you need some backlinks. Ignoring links is a death sentence. Anyone who says they didn't build links built links in some way, through PPC exposure or some other method. The links came in. They want you to think they did it "without links" but it's not true and won't ever be true in SEO.

"Why am I not ranking on the front page immediately?"

I hate to take this tone with anyone, but come the fuck on. I don't expect everyone to have a ton of experience, but I do like to know that you've at least tried before. I don't care if you're doing Keyword Golden Ratio KGR stuff or not, because...

It's very rare for Google to come out of the gates ranking anyone on the front page right after indexation unless it's a Query that Deserves Freshness. It's RARE. If they allowed this, spammers would churn and burn trash content instead of focusing on links and the entire index would be a rotation of trash content ranking until removed and then replaced by more trash.

Every single page in the index has an age measurement starting at the moment it gets indexed. If a page that's less optimized than yours has reached the maximum needed age to not be throttled by age, and your post is brand new and has 1% of the needed age, then it doesn't matter if you're more optimized.

You might have 100 points for on-page and they have 50 points. But they've been in the index for 3 years and you've been in it for 1 day. Your 100 points gets multipiled by this dampening age factor (your score is 1%) and suddenly your actual on-page score becomes 1 (not 100). In time, this throttle will be released more and more and you'll rank where you "should".

99.5% percent of the posts I publish, whether on new sites or older DR50 sites and all in between go through this. You rank decently, you slide back quickly, then you do the slow climb up to where you "should" be. Links can help to a degree, but it's all about age.

The only surefire way to bypass this is to optimize for a term nobody else has ever optimized for. And that's called wasting your time unless it's a new trend that's about to explode.

Keep publishing and stop freaking out about each and every post. This entire method is supposed to work on scale. You shouldn't even look at your damn stats till you hit 100 posts and 6 months have passed. That's when you might start seeing results.

-----

Work Smarter & Faster

Here's some perspective for you. Here's one of my newer projects that I'm journaling about here. I'm not doing the doing the SEO Avalanche method though what I do does slightly resemble it. Here's the money stats from the first full year:

​

Look how many months went by before I saw even a dollar come in, let alone $100. It took to the full year mark for me to break $1,000 a month in revenue only (meaning I've still not taken a penny in profit yet, I'm in the red).

I know how to do SEO and succeed with it quickly. And it still took me a year to hit the $1k/m mark. If you keep messing around as a newbie, you'll never hit it. All of your minutia questions will be answered over time once you actually have data to look at. Work to get that data.

​

Every minute you worry about the tiny shit you aren't building the momentum you need to see your green bars start growing. "Is Google going to index my post or what?" That's literally how they make their money. They don't need your help and you don't even know how to help them anyways.

The other thing is, I'm not targeting 0-10 volume keywords. I'd actually say that that's complete and utter self-sabotage if you intend on making any meaningful money in the next decade. Congratulations if you rank #1 for a 10 volume KGR keyword. You'll get 4 visitors per month from that, maybe 10 with one-time brand new never-before-seen search queries that'll never happen again.

You don't have to start that low in volume. You'd be surprised the kind of off-chance wins you'll receive if you spread your wings a little bit. Sometimes Google likes the way you formatted a post so much that you'll rank #1 relatively quickly for a crazy volume term, but you won't get any of those surprises if you don't try for them.

And "failing" at a 10,000 volume search term often means you'll still get 1,000's of visitors from long-tails related to that big term. Winning at a KGR 0-10 volume term means you'll get 4 visitors maximum. I understand that you're supposed to graduate up out of these small levels fairly quickly, but some of you are talking on the forum about "I now have 60 articles in the 0-10 volume range". It truly makes me sad. 60 articles is about what it took me to hit $1k/m.

Run this experiment if you want... Post an article for a KGR 10 - 100 volume term with a KD less than 5, and post one for a 10,000 volume term with a KD less than 15. Then find a way to get a single contextual, dofollow backlink with the exact match anchor for the main parent keyword to each post, then forget about it for 6 months. Then pull up the historical traffic for those posts from publish day till the present.

You'll be surprised that you probably get more traffic to the 10 - 100 volume term than you thought and say "why the hell did I not get at least one link sooner?"

Then you'l look at the 10k volume page's traffic and be astounded at how much traffic you're getting to that post and say "why the hell did I mess around with 0 volume terms for so long?"

-----

Stop Waiting for Permission to Level Up

I also think there's one important detail that was overlooked by a lot of you guys following this method, and you're getting trapped in it bad, as evidenced by your posts about this method around the forum:

SEO has a significant time lag.

That's the important detail that's being missed. Let me explain it since I'm already rambling.

If you start at Level 0 and target 0-10 volume terms and then wait and wait and wait for Google to give you 10 visitors daily until you level up, you're going to wait half a damn year, especially on a new site.

The thing you have to realize is, if you've published 50 articles at 10 volume terms, you've already leveled up. You just won't see Google confirm that for 3-6 months, possibly longer if you aren't building links.

IMPORTANT: You don't need to wait on Google to confirm you leveled up to know you leveled up.

If you did your KGR keyword research right, you will rank for most of what you published. So do the math: 20 posts at 10 volume should give you 200 potential volume, multiplied by a 40% CTR at #1 in the SERPs. That gives you 80 visitors a month, divided by 30 days, which lands you just under 3 visitors a day. Figure you're going to get double that with one-time searches. That's 6 visitors a day. (I'm embarrassed to even be talking about such little numbers of traffic).

That's 6 visitors a day three to six months from now. Are you really going to keep publishing for 10 volume keywords for that long because you didn't realize you already achieved the goal and are just waiting on your posts to age you in the index?

I'm trying to read the original post in this thread again. I'm not really seeing @CCarter suggest you need to wait on Google. He's actually got one section that suggests you do about 30 articles per month at Level 0 then move to Level 1 for the next month, and then Level 2, all without waiting on Google.

He doesn't say to cover every single possible KGR keyword you can find in a specific level either. You want to choose wisely, publish 30 of them or so, and level yourself up (knowing Google will lag way behind you in time).

Me, personally, I'd tell you to start with terms around 100 volume. You can still find them with nearly zero competition, and when you take them down you'll discover that the higher volume the main keyword has, the exponentially larger amount of long-tails and related one-time searches exist.

But the main point of this part of my post is to stop waiting on Google to tell you when to level up and use your brain. @bernard already told you:

This game is really all about future time orientation ability.

I drank all of my morning coffee way too fast and got all juiced up. I'm going to publish this even at risk of embarrassment, because it's still not as embarrassing as talking about 4 visitors a month from ranking #1.

And get some backlinks, for the love of all that is good and holy.

 

[Travelingpizza]

"How to determine your true tier is by publishing an article and seeing whether you land in the top 10 for the main term naturally. If you target a 100 monthly search term and land in the top 10 that's your tier."

"IF you CANNOT land in the top 10, then that's not your natural non-power boosted tier."

"If none of your pages enter the top 10 for the 30-45 terms upon immediately publishing YOU GOT PROBLEMS."

"Why am I not ranking on the front page immediately?"

I hate to take this tone with anyone, but come the fuck on. I don't expect everyone to have a ton of experience, but I do like to know that you've at least tried before. I don't care if you're doing Keyword Golden Ratio KGR stuff or not, because...

It's very rare for Google to come out of the gates ranking anyone on the front page right after indexation unless it's a Query that Deserves Freshness. It's RARE. If they allowed this, spammers would churn and burn trash content instead of focusing on links and the entire index would be a rotation of trash content ranking until removed and then replaced by more trash.

I couldn't agree more with you regarding everything you said. The only reason I even asked/brought this point up was because of the method's instructions I quoted above.

I'm well aware this isn't some sort of magic formula, but @CCarter was rather insistant on the fact that we should see rankings on the first page upon indexation.

So yeah, was just making sure I was following the blueprint with the right understanding

 

[CCarter]

You shouldn't be forcing indexation with GSC, Google prefers finding URLs themselves, they've stated that multiple times before there was even a GSC or WMT or anything.

So how do you get Google to find URLs themselves? Post your URL on social media with the main keyword as hashtags. Google literally has Twitter Carousels in its search results - they are constantly monitoring Twitter and social media platforms for viral activity and the latest news, therefore they will find your URL "naturally" by using hashtags.

You guys are over-complicating everything. Hashtags are simple, if I'm targeting health insurance, I'll use #HealthInsurance and then 2-4 other tags that are related. If there is a local play like #Chicago, I throw that in. There is no need for in-depth keyword research for hashtags or some tool.

I'm well aware this isn't some sort of magic formula, but @CCarter was rather insistant on the fact that we should see rankings on the first page upon indexation.

I don't understand the problem to be honest. Maybe I'm not reading it correctly. The last line you quoted stated that if you publish 30-45 articles and cannot landing a single one in the top 10 your site has problems - serious problems.

You published 10 articles and 6 of them landed on page 1 (Top 10).

So what's the problem?

The pages move out of the top 10 - so? You've got 20-35 other pieces of content to publish. In 6 months you need 180 articles, this is the long-term game plan here guys.

You're wasting time closely monitoring the each positions and doing re-indexing is minutia. This why I say writing 180 articles is a death blow, hire writers to write the content, otherwise you'll be coveting every single piece of article like coveting a grain of sand on a beach. You aren't going to get anywhere that way.

If you guys can honestly write 180 articles yourselves in 6 months for your industry you guys are gods.

 

[Travelingpizza]

If you guys can honestly write 180 articles yourselves in 6 months for your industry you guys are gods.

Yeah I outsource every article and I agree. I am quite amazed at those who are able to churn content day in and day out.

There's actually a journey on another forum where a guy successfully writes/posts 3000 words a day. He has been doing that + outsourcing content on 3 or 4 sites that are working quite well. I admire this kind of commitment and mental fortitude. Usually, writers tend to burn out quickly.

 

[DanielS]

If you guys can honestly write 180 articles yourselves in 6 months for your industry you guys are gods.

I’ll have written 150 articles in about 2.5 months near the end of October.

 

[Travelingpizza]

I’ll have written 150 articles in about 2.5 months near the end of October.

Congratulations man, that speaks lengths about your dedication and your confidence in your project. How many words does that represent in total?

 

[DanielS]

Congratulations man, that speaks lengths about your dedication and your confidence in your project. How many words does that represent in total?

The 150 articles will be around 150,000 words total when all is said and done. I do plan on updating articles- adding 1 more H2, change images, etc. but this will come after each of the 150 articles is published to the website. I’d rather have an 800 word article aging than a 1000 word article not aging.

BTW- Keep in mind that 99% of these articles are targeting 0-10 monthly search volume keywords, so they don’t need to be 2000 word pillar posts (from what I’ve been told). Mind you, each article comes equipped with 2-3 relevant H2s also between 0-10 monthly searches, so the combined known monthly search volume of each article is 0-30 searches per. month.