Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

No New Matches Lately

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • mkdexter
    replied
    Basically there is lots of stuff going on, some related to build 37 and some not... for example, dirty power issues.. I'm sure things will get back on track soon.

    Matt.

    Leave a comment:


  • hodgept
    replied
    no family finder matches for a long time

    I think the problem with no matches is:

    1. the build 36 to 37 is still screwed up or

    2. the geno.2 tests are clogging things up

    Leave a comment:


  • JPHutchins
    replied
    I had 5 new matches on 3/14/2013 and 1 new match on 4/2/2013. And 12 in February for a total of 17 since 1/1/2013.

    Leave a comment:


  • PennyToo
    replied
    Matches in April

    I had 4 matches in April, the most recent one on April 16.

    Leave a comment:


  • RondaMiller
    replied
    I had 3 matches 2 Apr 2013.

    Leave a comment:


  • aidan
    replied
    I can't remember the last time I had any Family Finder matches.

    Leave a comment:


  • Adele in Oz
    replied
    I only got the test done here because my cousin already had a sample here from a previous ydna project he particpated in. I am trying to find out is he is my cousin or not due to a discrepancy on my grandfathers death certificate. I waited for the 7 weeks for the results, then nothing and they changed the finish date to 3rd June instead.
    Ftdna really seems to have dropped the ball since they started the grab for the 23 and me dollar with their conversion offer. I am not happy with this company any more. I used to recommend it to everyone but now I couldn't honestly do so any more.
    I lost so many matches when they changed their chips and got told my matches from the affy were 'noise' when I had actually found the links with a few of those distant cousins that didn't show up on the Illumina.

    If they can't get the job done then maybe they should refund the money they happily took from us. it's that simple.

    Leave a comment:


  • sjadelson
    replied
    Six weeks since the last match with most of my kits, I've personally gotten only 5 since (on 16 Apr). If the raw count on the home page is to be believed, the incoming rate of kits is about the same as it has been for the last couple of years, averaging 100/day. It would be nice to see some results of all that....

    Leave a comment:


  • mixedkid
    replied
    No new matches since April 2 for me or the other kits I manage. I continue to get matches on 23 and Me and Ancestry.

    I still very much enjoy reading the posts in the forum on FTDNA though. There are a few good regular posters I enjoy reading on 23 and Me, but it seems I still gravitate back to FTDNA.

    Leave a comment:


  • econnore
    replied
    Any New Matches Lately?

    I haven't had any new matches since early April, and those paltry few were the usual impossible to connect the dots, probably Ashkenazi matches, but with few surnames.

    Leave a comment:


  • T E Peterman
    replied
    I think they are putting the finishing touches on getting Build 37 SNPs aligned right.

    I think they got things to where the vast majority are right. Of my 40 cousins that I had test, the centimorgan counts are currently about where they should be.

    But there are still a few that at last report (ie, postings on this forum) indicated they had no matches. I think Family Tree DNA is going through this with a fine tooth comb (so to speak) & identifying the remaining problems.

    I think they will probably do what they did on April 2 sometime soon, namely upload the latest (hopefully final) refinements, as well as whatever batches have come in.

    I've had a cousin's results waiting on the sidelines now for about a month.

    I would rather have good matches later than bad matches now; but I agree with everyone that it would be nice if Family Tree DNA would post an explanation.

    Timothy Peterman

    Leave a comment:


  • NYMark
    replied
    Agreed!!!

    Originally posted by Lklundin View Post
    Actually, I don't really understand anything and I am honestly getting tired of all the (potential for) speculation...

    Come on FTDNA, get your act together and tell your customers what you are doing with their data.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lklundin
    replied
    Originally posted by NYMark View Post
    You understand all this far better than I do. . .I'm wondering what you think is going on. Do you think this is some kind of improvised hybrid designed to allay customer outrage over the "glitch"?
    Actually, I don't really understand anything and I am honestly getting tired of all the (potential for) speculation...

    Come on FTDNA, get your act together and tell your customers what you are doing with their data.

    Leave a comment:


  • NYMark
    replied
    You understand all this far better than I do. . .I'm wondering what you think is going on. Do you think this is some kind of improvised hybrid designed to allay customer outrage over the "glitch"?

    Originally posted by Lklundin View Post
    OK, thanks.

    The information is kindly provided by Dr. Turner, so no information yet from FTDNA.

    According to Dr. Turner I have been downloading raw data from Build 36 all the time.

    That is not the whole explanation.

    While the SNPs in my current Build 36 raw data (which FTDNA briefly offered for download as Build 37) have identical positions compared to the original Build 36 data, the two versions of the Build 36 data still has some significant differences:

    1) 823 SNPs have been removed from the current version of the Build 36 data:
    1A): 69 of these were no-calls
    1B) 747 of these had an actual value, [CATG]{2}
    1C): 7 of these had a different value: DD, II or ID

    2) 2197 SNPs now have a new value:
    2A) 2004 no-calls now have an actual value
    2B) 158 SNPs have been changed from an actual value to a to no-call
    2C) 35 SNPs have new values

    I would have much preferred not to figure this out myself but instead to get an actual explanation from FTDNA.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lklundin
    replied
    Originally posted by NYMark View Post
    I just downloaded my raw data, and it is still Build 36 based on the filename and on the position of the first SNP.

    Here's a discussion:

    http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-04/1366485939
    OK, thanks.

    The information is kindly provided by Dr. Turner, so no information yet from FTDNA.

    According to Dr. Turner I have been downloading raw data from Build 36 all the time.

    That is not the whole explanation.

    While the SNPs in my current Build 36 raw data (which FTDNA briefly offered for download as Build 37) have identical positions compared to the original Build 36 data, the two versions of the Build 36 data still has some significant differences:

    1) 823 SNPs have been removed from the current version of the Build 36 data:
    1A): 69 of these were no-calls
    1B) 747 of these had an actual value, [CATG]{2}
    1C): 7 of these had a different value: DD, II or ID

    2) 2197 SNPs now have a new value:
    2A) 2004 no-calls now have an actual value
    2B) 158 SNPs have been changed from an actual value to a to no-call
    2C) 35 SNPs have new values

    I would have much preferred not to figure this out myself but instead to get an actual explanation from FTDNA.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X