Help with 66/67 match!!

[Padgett]

Ok, I've found a 66/67 match with someone with a different surname. The only difference is on the 464c which is known to be fast mutating.

FTDNA is giving a 95% probability of a MRCA of 8 generations and 71% at 4 generations. The percent is actually 100% for 24 generations - this is the first time I've seen a probablity of 100% on any match.

Have you had a match this close before with someone that appears to be unrelated based on paper genealogies? I'm very excited about this match, but perplexed as well.

[GvdM]

Ok, I've found a 66/67 match with someone with a different surname. The only difference is on the 464c which is known to be fast mutating.

FTDNA is giving a 95% probability of a MRCA of 8 generations and 71% at 4 generations. The percent is actually 100% for 24 generations - this is the first time I've seen a probablity of 100% on any match.

Have you had a match this close before with someone that appears to be unrelated based on paper genealogies? I'm very excited about this match, but perplexed as well.

Well, you are definately the same male line, I have no doubt about that. There must be a non-paternal event somewhere. Adoption, out of wedlock, something along those lines. I would start looking at geographic locations and see where the two families may have been in close contact.

[Bob Swinea]

I cannot speak for a 66/67 match but I have a 37/37 YDNA match with a man with a different surname. I happen to have the foundational DNA for my particular family lineage. At best I [we] match his particular family DNA profile 34/37. We expect to find an unanticipated parental event. The way I understand all the math goes something like this: 37/37 match = common male ancestor within the last 200 years. 67/67 match = common male ancestor within the last 100 years or sooner.

Best wishes on your hunt. I agree with a previous post. You and your 66/67 match are absolutely of the same direct male line.

Bob

[Arch Yeomans]

wow

Ok, I've found a 66/67 match with someone with a different surname. The only difference is on the 464c which is known to be fast mutating.

FTDNA is giving a 95% probability of a MRCA of 8 generations and 71% at 4 generations. The percent is actually 100% for 24 generations - this is the first time I've seen a probablity of 100% on any match.

Have you had a match this close before with someone that appears to be unrelated based on paper genealogies? I'm very excited about this match, but perplexed as well.

That's pretty incredible. I've been 25 marker tested and it's been months and it seems like I'm nowhere close to a match. It's weird how little information is available, but when I had 12 markers done, I was constantly getting a notice.

But 66 out of 67 match must be pretty exciting.

[bsbeene]

67/67 exact match

My husband has a 67/67 exact match with one person with same surname. And, one 37/37 match,same surname, each of the matches are to men whose descendants were brothers. Is the common ancestor a father of the brothers or the fathers father? FTDNA is giving a 99.89% probability of 12 generations. I know that it is not within the last 204 years.

[tomcat]

Ok, I've found a 66/67 match with someone with a different surname. The only difference is on the 464c which is known to be fast mutating.

FTDNA is giving a 95% probability of a MRCA of 8 generations and 71% at 4 generations. The percent is actually 100% for 24 generations - this is the first time I've seen a probablity of 100% on any match.

Have you had a match this close before with someone that appears to be unrelated based on paper genealogies? I'm very excited about this match, but perplexed as well.

Do either of you have any other lower quality matches confirming of surname or surname variant or known geographic origins? Reason I ask is the problem might be posed as; which of the two surnames properly belongs to your shared halplotype? Or under which surname is ought one look for a non-ordinary event?

Also people do change their surnames.