Dear Andreas, You might want to restate in different words what you are asking that someone confirm since I am having difficulty understanding what your question is. The ICW tool that Family Tree DNA provides is better than nothing, but it leaves a lot to be desired. The tool is particularly not all that helpful for people who come from endogamous populations such as Mennonites or Jews because such groups generally share DNA segments with most other people with that ancestry. If a person doesn't come from an endogamous population, then you can usually assume that if two of your matches share a HIR with you in the same region of a specific chromosome and share DNA in common with each other using the ICW tool then they will be sharing the same DNA segment. A better way is to e-mail one or both of the matches and ask them to check their match list to see if the other person shares the same HIR that you share with them. I actually don't like to use Family Finder's ICW tool all that often. I prefer to download all of my parents' aggregate matching segment data and sort the matches based on whether or not I also share the same segment with the matches that my parents share with the matches. I find this to be a nice clean way to separate matches into those who are matching my parents on one chromosome and those who are matching my parents on the opposite chromosome. This allows me to form what will generally be triangulated groups (at least for the HIRs that are over 12 to 15 cMs) without needing to go through the hassle of asking my matches on the same regions of the chromosome whether or not they match each other. I don't like to use HIRs under about 4 cMs as a general rule because the probability that any given HIR under 4 cMs is IBS is relatively high. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Andreas West via Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 9:40 PM To: DNA Genealogy Mailing List Subject: [DNA] Are FTDNA's 1cM matches shown in ICW as well? Hi everyone, was just stumbling across a post on WikiTree forum on DNAGedcom being able to triangulate data from GEDmatch and FTDNA. Leaving GEDmatch out for this thread (I think the OP refers to the paid tier 1 option which gives access to the top 200 triangulated matches and downloading that screen result - please correct me if there is another way) I want to question that remark about FTDNA. My assumption is that ICW (which isn't triangulation, can't repeat that often enough as there are still people out there who don't understand the difference or that there is one to start with) means that it includes all those 1cM matches (and larger) that FTDNA reports as a minimum criteria. Can someone confirm this? That makes the ICW tool even more worrisome if it's true as it's not even clear if a triangulated segment of only 1cM (or 2cM for that matter) is indeed an ancestral segment, triangulation or not (I refer to various discussions we had here and on other email lists about this - no need to start that discussion again until we have more proof). Andreas (WEST) born BASSO

Hi Tim, thanks for taking the time to answer. What I meant is that just using the ICW tool with your two matches B and C (without asking B and C where they match each other) is not triangulation to me. It might be semantics but to me it's more. Given that the ICW that FTDNA is showing between B and C can only be 1cM or 2cM large, even IF it's on the same loci (which is unknown without asking one of them AND getting that information) does it mean it's 100% a triangulated group → meaning it comes from a common ancestor? For me it's not. But that's what is stated in that WikiTree answer and also partially in the documentation of the ADSA tool. I quote from here: https://www.dnagedcom.com/adsa/adsamanual.html.php "The Autosomal DNA Segment Analyzer (ADSA) is a tool that takes your data from Family Tree DNA or GEDMATCH and constructs tables that include match and segment information as well as a visual graph of overlapping segments, juxtaposed with a customized, color-coded In-Common-With (ICW) matrix that will permit you to triangulate matching segments without having to look in multiple spreadsheets or on different web pages." **"will permit you to triangulate matching segments"!!!!** It uses both ICE and triangulate in the same sentence, giving the impression that it's possible to do with FTDNA's data (please note I'm not saying the ADSA tool can't do it, it's not possible with the data it receives as input). It's IMO (unless you get that B and C match data as mentioned, which can't be downloaded and imported in the ADSA tool BTW) not possible. So I think this is highly misleading and supports the confusion when people assume that: ICW = triangulation which is unfortunately not true. There is a likelihood (eg A, B and C all match at the same loci with 20+cM matches between each other - surely coming from a common ancestor) but like I mention given that FTDNA shows 1cM matches as ICW (which was my original question) I think we all agree that the jury is still out if this is indeed an ancestral segment verified by triangulation (see the following example): A matches B at loci for 5cM A matches C at loci for 5cM B matches C at **unknown** loci for 1cM We could even replace the 5cM with a longer 7cM segment. Is that more likely to be? Yes. Is it 100% proven? No. What we're missing here is phased genotyped data, as mentioned in this blog post: http://ourpuzzlingpast.com/geneblog/2015/01/31/chromosome-pile-ups-in- genetic-genealogy-examples-from-23andme-and-ftdna/ Lastly, what I don't want to express or start again is a discussion about the need for a better tool or how grateful we are to have at least this one (compared to no tool at Ancestry). That's discussed to death already. Andreas (WEST) born BASSO My ancestors: [http://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Basso-Family- Tree-23](http://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Basso-Family-Tree-23) "Tim Janzen via" <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Dear Andreas, > You might want to restate in different words what you are asking that > someone confirm since I am having difficulty understanding what your > question is. The ICW tool that Family Tree DNA provides is better than > nothing, but it leaves a lot to be desired. The tool is particularly not > all that helpful for people who come from endogamous populations such as > Mennonites or Jews because such groups generally share DNA segments with > most other people with that ancestry. If a person doesn't come from an > endogamous population, then you can usually assume that if two of your > matches share a HIR with you in the same region of a specific chromosome and > share DNA in common with each other using the ICW tool then they will be > sharing the same DNA segment. A better way is to e-mail one or both of the > matches and ask them to check their match list to see if the other person > shares the same HIR that you share with them. I actually don't like to use > Family Finder's ICW tool all that often. I prefer to download all of my > parents' aggregate matching segment data and sort the matches based on > whether or not I also share the same segment with the matches that my > parents share with the matches. I find this to be a nice clean way to > separate matches into those who are matching my parents on one chromosome > and those who are matching my parents on the opposite chromosome. This > allows me to form what will generally be triangulated groups (at least for > the HIRs that are over 12 to 15 cMs) without needing to go through the > hassle of asking my matches on the same regions of the chromosome whether or > not they match each other. I don't like to use HIRs under about 4 cMs as a > general rule because the probability that any given HIR under 4 cMs is IBS > is relatively high. > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen > > -----Original Message----- > From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Andreas West via > Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 9:40 PM > To: DNA Genealogy Mailing List > Subject: [DNA] Are FTDNA's 1cM matches shown in ICW as well? > > Hi everyone, > > > was just stumbling across a post on WikiTree forum on DNAGedcom being able > to triangulate data from GEDmatch and FTDNA. Leaving GEDmatch out for this > thread (I think the OP refers to the paid tier 1 option which gives access > to the top > 200 triangulated matches and downloading that screen result - please correct > me if there is another way) I want to question that remark about FTDNA. > > My assumption is that ICW (which isn't triangulation, can't repeat that > often enough as there are still people out there who don't understand the > difference or that there is one to start with) means that it includes all > those 1cM matches (and larger) that FTDNA reports as a minimum criteria. > > Can someone confirm this? > > That makes the ICW tool even more worrisome if it's true as it's not even > clear if a triangulated segment of only 1cM (or 2cM for that matter) is > indeed an ancestral segment, triangulation or not (I refer to various > discussions we had here and on other email lists about this - no need to > start that discussion again until we have more proof). > > Andreas (WEST) born BASSO > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message

Dear Andreas, I agree with you that simply having your matches match each other using the ICW tool doesn't necessarily mean that they triangulate. I agree with you that most of the small 1 and 2 cMs HIRs are IBS and therefore even if people match on them then this doesn't mean that this represents a DNA segment that was passed down from a shared ancestor. I disagree with the DNAGEDCOM statement about use of the ICW data. The data will likely triangulate most of the time, but certainly not 100% of the time, particularly for people who come from endogamous populations. I have suggested to Family Tree DNA that they should allow their customers to be able to compare their matches to each other like we can in 23andMe with the Family Inheritance: Advanced tool, but so far FTDNA has chosen not to allow that feature. I wish that they would at least create it as an opt in feature. I have advocated with both 23andMe and Family Tree DNA for at least 4 years to generate matches based on family phased data, but so far neither company has invested the time and effort to do that. Ancestry.com generates phased data, but the data is not 100% accurate because they don't use family data to generate phased data. As you mentioned, the lack of a chromosome browser at Ancestry. com dramatically reduces the utility of the AncestryDNA test. GEDmatch will generate phased data for you and will allow you to upload your own phased data if you would like to do that. One of the main reasons that GEDmatch is so popular is because it provides the serious autosomal genetic genealogist with the tools they need to run the kinds of comparisons they need to run. Sincerely, Tim Janzen From: Andreas West [mailto:ahnen@awest.de] Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 11:27 PM To: Tim Janzen; genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Cc: genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [DNA] Are FTDNA's 1cM matches shown in ICW as well? Hi Tim, thanks for taking the time to answer. What I meant is that just using the ICW tool with your two matches B and C (without asking B and C where they match each other) is not triangulation to me. It might be semantics but to me it's more. Given that the ICW that FTDNA is showing between B and C can only be 1cM or 2cM large, even IF it's on the same loci (which is unknown without asking one of them AND getting that information) does it mean it's 100% a triangulated group → meaning it comes from a common ancestor? For me it's not. But that's what is stated in that WikiTree answer and also partially in the documentation of the ADSA tool. I quote from here: https://www.dnagedcom.com/adsa/adsamanual.html.php "The Autosomal DNA Segment Analyzer (ADSA) is a tool that takes your data from Family Tree DNA or GEDMATCH and constructs tables that include match and segment information as well as a visual graph of overlapping segments, juxtaposed with a customized, color-coded In-Common-With (ICW) matrix that will permit you to triangulate matching segments without having to look in multiple spreadsheets or on different web pages." "will permit you to triangulate matching segments"!!!! It uses both ICE and triangulate in the same sentence, giving the impression that it's possible to do with FTDNA's data (please note I'm not saying the ADSA tool can't do it, it's not possible with the data it receives as input). It's IMO (unless you get that B and C match data as mentioned, which can't be downloaded and imported in the ADSA tool BTW) not possible. So I think this is highly misleading and supports the confusion when people assume that: ICW = triangulation which is unfortunately not true. There is a likelihood (eg A, B and C all match at the same loci with 20+cM matches between each other - surely coming from a common ancestor) but like I mention given that FTDNA shows 1cM matches as ICW (which was my original question) I think we all agree that the jury is still out if this is indeed an ancestral segment verified by triangulation (see the following example): A matches B at loci for 5cM A matches C at loci for 5cM B matches C at unknown loci for 1cM We could even replace the 5cM with a longer 7cM segment. Is that more likely to be? Yes. Is it 100% proven? No. What we're missing here is phased genotyped data, as mentioned in this blog post: http://ourpuzzlingpast.com/geneblog/2015/01/31/chromosome-pile-ups-in-geneti c-genealogy-examples-from-23andme-and-ftdna/ Lastly, what I don't want to express or start again is a discussion about the need for a better tool or how grateful we are to have at least this one (compared to no tool at Ancestry). That's discussed to death already. Andreas (WEST) born BASSO