My understanding of the purpose of the 111 marker test is that it should help to refine matches that have been established through the 67 marker tests.
In our case it appears to have done the opposite, as demonstrated by this specific example: (FTDNA FAQ explanation in brackets)
25 marker GD=2 (2 Probably Related)
37 marker GD=4 (4 Probably Related)
67 marker GD=6 (5-6 Related)
111 marker GD=13 (>10 Not Related- The two men are totally unrelated within the genealogical time frame on their direct paternal line.)
The above matches are between two people with the same surname with a supposed common ancestor likely to be more than 10 generation ago.
I am obviously not questioning the results themselves but I wonder how much credence should be given to the FTDNA interpretations as per their FAQ pages. Are we to take the 111 FAQ as gospel and that our previous result matches are just a lucky coincidence, or are the interpretations on the FAQ page too conservative and need to be reconsidered, for some, if not for all.
Any thoughts please.
In our case it appears to have done the opposite, as demonstrated by this specific example: (FTDNA FAQ explanation in brackets)
25 marker GD=2 (2 Probably Related)
37 marker GD=4 (4 Probably Related)
67 marker GD=6 (5-6 Related)
111 marker GD=13 (>10 Not Related- The two men are totally unrelated within the genealogical time frame on their direct paternal line.)
The above matches are between two people with the same surname with a supposed common ancestor likely to be more than 10 generation ago.
I am obviously not questioning the results themselves but I wonder how much credence should be given to the FTDNA interpretations as per their FAQ pages. Are we to take the 111 FAQ as gospel and that our previous result matches are just a lucky coincidence, or are the interpretations on the FAQ page too conservative and need to be reconsidered, for some, if not for all.
Any thoughts please.
Comment