Ancestry removing matches less than 8cM

[Gadget]

Just noticed that 'the longest segment' is now missing, not sure when it disappeared.

I'm sure it was there a couple of days ago. Well that didn't last long.

Presumably because it exposed how far Ancestry's Timber algorithm was diminishing matches, although I'm sure they'll say it was because it caused confusion .

If you click on the  blue part with info about the shared DNA  e.g.

 Shared DNA: 1,846 cM across 54 segments  

You'll get a new pop up window giving you info about the longest segment.

Shared DNA: 1,846 cM across 54 segments
Unweighted shared DNA: 1,846 cM
Longest segment: 174 cM

 

[melba_schmelba]

Just noticed that 'the longest segment' is now missing, not sure when it disappeared.

I'm sure it was there a couple of days ago. Well that didn't last long.

Presumably because it exposed how far Ancestry's Timber algorithm was diminishing matches, although I'm sure they'll say it was because it caused confusion .

If you click on the  blue part with info about the shared DNA  e.g.

 Shared DNA: 1,846 cM across 54 segments  

You'll get a new pop up window giving you info about the longest segment.

Shared DNA: 1,846 cM across 54 segments
Unweighted shared DNA: 1,846 cM
Longest segment: 174 cM

Ah so they're just hiding it .

[lisalisa]

oh I'm glad it's still there, it's interesting to see where the longest segment is greater (even much greater) than the shared dna figure, presumably the 'unweighted shared' is the figure before they cut it.

[Flemming]

Does anyone know if Ancestry still looks for common ancestors with 6cM and 7cM matches that you've managed to save, or do they only look at 9cM and above now?

[LizzieL]

Does anyone know if Ancestry still looks for common ancestors with 6cM and 7cM matches that you've managed to save, or do they only look at 9cM and above now?

I've just had a 7 turn up with "Common Ancestor" mark. Must have been in the last few days as I check CAs quite regularly. It was marked with my "holding" group by the automated process just before the 6s and 7s got chopped. I know it's new because I haven't assigned it to a "proper" group and added note of shared ancestors.

added
Ancestry are saying she's a half 6th cousin but I haven't verified yet. She has a private tree with 9 people so it must be using a lot of information from other people's trees.

[Flemming]

Good to know although a little ironic - Ancestry finding a common ancestor with a match at a level they say is inaccurate. 

[guest189040]

Good to know although a little ironic - Ancestry finding a common ancestor with a match at a level they say is inaccurate. 

Ancestry seems to cobble together a pathway from various existing trees into one probable branch.

I have about thirty matches with Common Ancestors and all but two I am happy with the pathways Ancestry has created as I have been through each and verified each person.

[Flemming]

Yes, I'm happy with most of mine as well, notwithstanding they come and go (I presume because other people are changing their trees), but it's a continual reminder of what's been lost (50% in my case). Ancestry's 'give feedback' box keeps cropping up and I feel like writing 'what's the point - you don't take any notice of it'. Perhaps someone will send them a link to this thread 

[pharmaT]

Yes, I'm happy with most of mine as well, notwithstanding they come and go (I presume because other people are changing their trees), but it's a continual reminder of what's been lost (50% in my case). Ancestry's 'give feedback' box keeps cropping up and I feel like writing 'what's the point - you don't take any notice of it'. Perhaps someone will send them a link to this thread 

I've already done that, along with reminding them of specific issues which I had complained about and they had completely ignored, they ignored that too.