My post was limited in scope -- what are the chances of finding a *random* match that turns out to be close as a 3rd cousin or so? I'm still thinking about why we hear anecdotal reports as often as we do. Kimberly Powell found a close cousin in all three of the databases: FTDNA, 23andMe, and AncestryDNA. Ann Turner On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Debbie Kennett <[email protected]>wrote: > Ann > > I think the figures need to be turned on their head. It's not the current > population that's important but the historic population. I only have access > to figures for Britain and Ireland. There are stats on this page: > > http://homepage.ntlworld.com/hitch/gendocs/pop.html > > At 30 years a generation, 10 generations takes us back to 1700. Of that > population of just over six and a half million presumably quite a large > number would already be genetically related so the effective pool of > ancestors might be in the region of perhaps half a million. And of course > we're looking for matches not just on one line but on all our lines. At ten > generations we have 1024 direct ancestors. > > My impression is that all the confirmed cousins are found in colonial > American lines as these people tend to be related not just on one line but > on multiple lines. I've got about 500 matches at 23andMe and my mum and dad > between them have about 150 matches at FTDNA, but I still haven't been able > to identify a single shared common ancestor. It doesn't help from my point > of view that most of my matches, and especially those at 23andMe, are with > people in America who don't know where in the UK their ancestors are from. > Even with my few matches with Brits and Australians I've still not been > able > to find a link. > > Debbie Kennett > http://cruwys.blogspot.com >