Thanks Jim! :) I am VERY impressed with your 700 shared ancestor hints. I have a pretty well developed tree, and have only 106 hints. But then again, I only have 688 4th cousin or closer matches. One set of my great-grandparents were immigrants. On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jim Bartlett <[email protected]> wrote: > LeeAnn, > > When I can get to my PC, I'll post my message. By Hints, I mean that I > have 700 AncestryDNA Matches with green leaf Hints. I have almost 2,000 of > what AncestryDNA calls 4th cousins or closer (which are mostly 5C and 6C) - > these are the only Matches you'll see in any Shared Matches list. So even > your 8C Matches may have some 4C, or closer, Shared Matches. Thank goodness > there's not a quiz on this;>j > > Jim Bartlett - atDNA blog: www.segmentology.org > > > On Sep 1, 2017, at 9:08 AM, LeeAnn Stebbins <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Jim, since you have had such good luck with your matches uploading to > > Gedmatch, would you mind sharing the verbiage of your standard message to > > them? And when you say 700 hints- do you mean shared ancestor hints? > > > > LeeAnn > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Jim Bartlett <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> AncestryDNA will post Hints up to 8th cousins. I now have over 700 > Hints, > >> and I send a standard message to all urging an upload to GEDmatch, with > my > >> promise to report back to them my analysis of what I can decipher from > the > >> segment info. Hundreds have uploaded! And I am finding that 3C to 8C > Hints > >> are lining up on some segments - not all, but some - and it's growing > every > >> day. I add info in the Notes field in each case, starting with the > >> Ahnentafel number of the Common Ancestor (a great sort of the download). > >> Including non-Hint Matches, there are over 1,000 - many with segment > data. > >> All show up as little page icons in Shared Matches, which often gives a > >> very quick indication of where to look in the Trees of non-Hint Matches. > >> > >> Acknowledged that a high percentage of AncestryDNA Matches have no, or > >> very small, or Private Trees. Even so, I can encourage some of those > >> Matches when our SMs clearly point to a CA. > >> > >> And there are, of course, many more Matches, with segment data, from > FTDNA > >> and 23andMe (and hopefully soon from MyHeritage) that are all in play > >> through Triangulated Groups. > >> > >> I think we can "walk the Ancestors back" with some confidence to most of > >> the 1700s. > >> > >> Jim Bartlett - atDNA blog: www.segmentology.org > >> > >>> On Sep 1, 2017, at 2:02 AM, Tim Janzen <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> I agree with Jim on this. I think that we are going to have a tough > time > >>> linking phased autosomal segments to ancestors born prior to 1500. If > we > >>> were test every living person, get all their genealogies, and as well > as > >>> successfully test ancestors who have been buried in marked graves then > we > >>> would have a shot at linking some phased autosomal segments to > ancestors > >>> born prior to 1500. However, I don't think that this is very > realistic. > >>> The relatively easy ground to cover is shared ancestors in the 1800s. > >>> Confirming shared ancestors in the 1700s and 1600s is going to be > really > >>> tough due to a lack of genealogical records in many areas. Confirming > >>> relationships in the 1750 to 1800 time period is the next frontier for > >>> autosomal genetic genealogy from my standpoint. > >>> Sincerely, > >>> Tim Janzen > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: GENEALOGY-DNA [mailto:[email protected]] On > >> Behalf Of > >>> Jim Bartlett > >>> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 11:13 AM > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> Subject: Re: [DNA] Every person project > >>> > >>> I'd say no, IMO! Because of all the endogamy involved. Without some > >>> genealogical records, we could never sort it out. > >>> > >>> Jim Bartlett - atDNA blog: www.segmentology.org > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

LeeAnn, I work hard at this, but cannot take any credit for 707 SAH, or 1838 4C or closer Matches, or 919pp (45,900+) Matches - that is all the luck of the DNA draw. I star only Matches with a Common Ancestor or a GEDmatch upload (which also tells me the Triangulated Group they are in) - I have 993 stars (I can take credit for all the work involved in that) Here is my standard AncestryDNA message that is use most of the time: Iagree with the AncestryDNA Hint that our Common Ancestor may be [fill in surnames] Itis possible that we have other Common Ancestors, perhaps behind one of ourbrick walls. For this reason (and because I am mapping my DNA – specific sharedDNA segments tied to specific ancestors), I hope you will upload your DNA datato www.gedmatch.com. It’s a free site –easy to register – complete instructions on their home page. My GEDmatch ID is[edited out for this public post]. You will get many more Matches at GEDmatch, with their emails. And GEDmatchhas the best deep ancestry/ethnicity/geographic analysis utilities. No medicalor health info. Please let me know your GEDmatch kit number if you upload atGEDmatch. If you upload to GEDmatch, I’ll do the DNA analysis and report theresults back to you. I’ve already helped many of my Matches in this way. FYI,I’m having success with atDNA and would be happy tohelp you. See my How to Succeed list at: http://boards.rootsweb.com/topics.dnaresearch.autosomal/301/mb.ashx It has some good links at the end. My DNASegment-ology blog is at www.segmentology.org – written for genealogists in plain language Hope to hear from you. Jim Bartlett [email protected] Hereis a blog post I did on uploading to GEDmatch: https://segmentology.org/2017/01/19/uploading-to-gedmatch/ Hope the above helps - I think a key is a promise to help new Matches work through all of this. Anyone is free to also use the How to Succeed link (it's public) or any link to one of my blog posts. Jim Bartlett [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: LeeAnn Stebbins <[email protected]> To: genealogy-dna <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, Sep 1, 2017 11:24 am Subject: Re: [DNA] Every person project Thanks Jim! :) I am VERY impressed with your 700 shared ancestor hints. I have a pretty well developed tree, and have only 106 hints. But then again, I only have 688 4th cousin or closer matches. One set of my great-grandparents were immigrants. On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jim Bartlett <[email protected]> wrote: > LeeAnn, > > When I can get to my PC, I'll post my message. By Hints, I mean that I > have 700 AncestryDNA Matches with green leaf Hints. I have almost 2,000 of > what AncestryDNA calls 4th cousins or closer (which are mostly 5C and 6C) - > these are the only Matches you'll see in any Shared Matches list. So even > your 8C Matches may have some 4C, or closer, Shared Matches. Thank goodness > there's not a quiz on this;>j > > Jim Bartlett - atDNA blog: www.segmentology.org > > > On Sep 1, 2017, at 9:08 AM, LeeAnn Stebbins <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Jim, since you have had such good luck with your matches uploading to > > Gedmatch, would you mind sharing the verbiage of your standard message to > > them? And when you say 700 hints- do you mean shared ancestor hints? > > > > LeeAnn > > > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Jim Bartlett <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> AncestryDNA will post Hints up to 8th cousins. I now have over 700 > Hints, > >> and I send a standard message to all urging an upload to GEDmatch, with > my > >> promise to report back to them my analysis of what I can decipher from > the > >> segment info. Hundreds have uploaded! And I am finding that 3C to 8C > Hints > >> are lining up on some segments - not all, but some - and it's growing > every > >> day. I add info in the Notes field in each case, starting with the > >> Ahnentafel number of the Common Ancestor (a great sort of the download). > >> Including non-Hint Matches, there are over 1,000 - many with segment > data. > >> All show up as little page icons in Shared Matches, which often gives a > >> very quick indication of where to look in the Trees of non-Hint Matches. > >> > >> Acknowledged that a high percentage of AncestryDNA Matches have no, or > >> very small, or Private Trees. Even so, I can encourage some of those > >> Matches when our SMs clearly point to a CA. > >> > >> And there are, of course, many more Matches, with segment data, from > FTDNA > >> and 23andMe (and hopefully soon from MyHeritage) that are all in play > >> through Triangulated Groups. > >> > >> I think we can "walk the Ancestors back" with some confidence to most of > >> the 1700s. > >> > >> Jim Bartlett - atDNA blog: www.segmentology.org > >> > >>> On Sep 1, 2017, at 2:02 AM, Tim Janzen <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> I agree with Jim on this. I think that we are going to have a tough > time > >>> linking phased autosomal segments to ancestors born prior to 1500. If > we > >>> were test every living person, get all their genealogies, and as well > as > >>> successfully test ancestors who have been buried in marked graves then > we > >>> would have a shot at linking some phased autosomal segments to > ancestors > >>> born prior to 1500. However, I don't think that this is very > realistic. > >>> The relatively easy ground to cover is shared ancestors in the 1800s. > >>> Confirming shared ancestors in the 1700s and 1600s is going to be > really > >>> tough due to a lack of genealogical records in many areas. Confirming > >>> relationships in the 1750 to 1800 time period is the next frontier for > >>> autosomal genetic genealogy from my standpoint. > >>> Sincerely, > >>> Tim Janzen > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: GENEALOGY-DNA [mailto:[email protected]] On > >> Behalf Of > >>> Jim Bartlett > >>> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 11:13 AM > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> Subject: Re: [DNA] Every person project > >>> > >>> I'd say no, IMO! Because of all the endogamy involved. Without some > >>> genealogical records, we could never sort it out. > >>> > >>> Jim Bartlett - atDNA blog: www.segmentology.org