Mary Lou I, too, originally looked at all of the smaller segments. Then, as I began to confirm Common Ancestors with my atDNA matches, I soon found that the same small segments were in different lines. In other words they could not have come from a Common Ancestor. And do I realized the small segments could not help me with genealogy. I now only focus on the large (over 7.7cM) segments. Every one of your FF matches has at least one of these. I've had the best results (confirming paper trails to Common Ancestors with over 30 FF matches) by developing an exhaustive, alphabetical list of my ancestral surnames, and then adding the Patriarch's given name and some dates and places (use the Matriarch's info if necessary). Each of your FF matches will have only one of your ancestors in common (the one who gave both of you the large atDNA segment) The list is designed to let your atDNA match easily pick out his/her ancestor (usually a husband/wife couple) - so email this list to each and every match. And encourage them to do the same. If neither of you spots a Common Ancestor, then look through the other's list for matching place/times - you may well have an other-side-of-the-brick-wall ancestor there/then. Your Common Ancestor could be back 7-10 or more generations. Your Y-DNA and mtDNA lines are less than one percent of your ancestry, so don't focus on them. Be prepared to match on any ancestor. My 2 cents... Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Dec 8, 2011, at 11:08 AM, Mary Lou Ramsey <[email protected]> wrote: > I received my FF matches in April 2011 and now have 169 matches but only 6 > or so who are even possibly 2nd cousins, with perhaps 35 who are suggested > 3rd-4th cousins. At the outset I read several books, and look forward to > reading more about autosomal as more material is available. > > I decided to spend a great amount of time charting every match, even small > ones, on large accounting pages, and did this for the first 140 people. I > believe this shows that many small matches tend to be with the same > individuals as where these people match me in larger matches, and seem to > give insights as to what ancestral surname we have in common. > > I would not have spent this much time charting the thousands of small bits > of matches, but was very impatient to learn more about autosomal genetic > cousin matching and could think of no other way. About 1/3 of the matches > don't give a list of surnames being searched, or a gedcom. I do have > about 2 Known Relative matches, and a couple more where I am confident > there is a match about 5 generations back. > > I spent years researching and making gedcom of my paternal McHaffie family > (formerly Mckilhaffie/Mackilhaffy etc), one name study, and some 18th > century Pennsylvania McHaffie male descendants have tested and are > Haplogroup I2a. Research has led to 14th, 15th, etc., century individuals > with variant spellings, all in southwestern Scotland, mostly in > Wigtownshire area records, and my research seems to point to possible roots > being pre-Celtic Britons. Certain other families I believe McHaffies > related to in 14th c. do have descendants in I2a also. Most men with > similar sounding names are in the R1 haplogroups. > > I have one full first cousin, male, and another who is a half first cousin > and they don't plan to have ydna testing done at present. All of us are > in old age. > > My mtDNA proved to be unique, haplogroup V with a mutation at 551 that > matches no one so far, and I don't plan further testing there. I'm > certain that there are hundreds of descendants of my earliest maternal > ancestress, Elizabeth Stevens, born 1793 NC d 1855. > > There have been no y-dna matches at all for my husband's 12 markers since > 2005, so further testing on that doesn't seem promising at present. Our > sons will be tested for Family Finder soon. > > I have at least a surname for all but 5 of my 32 great-great-great > grandparents who were born around the time of the Revolution. > > I am wondering if I should continue with posting the hundreds of small > matches, creating a hand marked chromosome sheet for each new matching > person, printing their data, comparing and doing studies of where matches > tend to cluster and what ancestral surname is likely, or if I should just > post the large matches on the accounting sheets for about 10cM and above > and try to be patient. > Mary Lou