Author Topic: Ancestry's Shared Matching is only partial!  (Read 1126 times)

Offline diplodicus

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
  • Remember, no great adventure started with salad.
    • View Profile
Ancestry's Shared Matching is only partial!
« on: Tuesday 05 September 17 09:10 BST (UK) »
Both my children have completed DNA tests with Ancestry as have I. It has proved fascinating to see the difference in shared matches; my son is far more likely to share a match with a Welsh (maternal) relation than my daughter. However, there is one frustration with Ancestry's shared matching methodology...

Ancestry only reveals shared matches with fourth cousins or closer. I have found that as often as not, the shared matches tab fails to inform me that one or both of my offspring are also a match with this person.

If you manage another test as well as your own, then click on a shared match of someone. Lets's assume they don't show any shared matches. Now click on that someone's name at the top of the page. This is that person's Profile Page. It invites you to choose another test.

Lo and behold, it sometimes tell me that my son and/or daughter is a match even though they don't appear as one when I merely click the "Shared Matches" tab.
Thomas, Davies, Jones, Walters, Daniel in Carmarthenshire and Ceredigion. That should narrow it down a bit!
Vincent: Fressingfield, Suffolk, Stockton & Sunderland.
Murtha/Murtaugh: Dundalk & Sunderland
Ingram: Cairnie by Huntly, Scotland then Abergavenny, Monmouthshire.
Bardouleau: London - in memory of my stepmother Annie Rose née Bardouleau who put up with a lot from me.
gedmatch.com A006809
Kit uploaded to familytreedna.com B171041
Y-DNA R-M269 & mtDNA U5b1f

Offline Seaton Smithy

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
  • Previously known as "neb_maat_re".
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry's Shared Matching is only partial!
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 05 September 17 23:19 BST (UK) »
I also find this failure to show Shared Matches in the Distant Cousin range to be frustrating, particularly as many of the higher ranked matches in that range are potentially closer relatives with the actual amounts shared artificially reduced by the Timber algorithm.

I have two Distant Cousin matches that are ranked No 2 (20 cM) and No 5 (19.6 cM) on the list who share a distinctive surname but not enough to go on to confirm the relationship.  Recently a new match of around 15 cm came up with a different surname but with a tree that included the distinctive surname in it's title.  A Google search indicated these probably were siblings and also revealed the possible names of their parents.  A google search for their mother revealed an online nickname that looked familiar - sure enough, she was No 6 on my list also with 19.6 cM. 

If Ancestry shown these people to be Shared Matches it would have been easier to establish the relationship between them.