Tag Archives: genealogy

ProTools Part 26

Posted on by
15

Documenting a GUESS

Setup… A Match, with No Family Tree, is a 1C to a Known Match per ProTools. The Known Match is in my Tree with a specific line of descent from our MRCA; and a 1C estimate is very reliable. I want to put the new Match in my Tree and place them in my Common Ancestor spreadsheet – to “take care of” that Match by placing them almost certainly where they belong in my Tree.

As I’ve blogged before, there are only two options to place a 1C to a Known Match: 1. a grandchild of the Known Match’s paternal grandparents; or 2. a grandchild of the Known Match’s maternal grandparents. In other words, the new Match is a child of a sibling of the Known Match’s father or mother. A quick review of my Shared Match list with this new Match, clearly reveals the Match is on the same side (paternal or maternal) that I am on with the Known Match. In other words, I know the path from the Known Match back to our MRCA is through their father or mother. I can now see, through ProTools,  the new Match is related to me that way, too.

So I know the path from the MRCA down to the new Match – it’s the same path that I have with the Known Match down to, and including, the grandparent of the Known Match. What I don’t know is the name of the son or daughter of that grandparent = the parent of the new Match.

Up until recently, I’ve just named that son or daughter “block” as GUESS or Unknown in my Tree and in the “cell” of my spreadsheet. I’m now up to a dozen or so of these and can see many more on the horizon. My index of people in my Tree is filling up with GUESS and Unknown people…

I see four options for a name:

1. Continue with GUESS or Unknown [I usually reserve GUESS for iffy guesses]. I don’t like this – it’s not helpful to me or others reviewing my Tree – someday it may be very confusing.

2. Child of [name the grandparent]; ex: “Child of Bob JONES”

3. Parent of [the new Match]; ex: “Parent of Horatio Mitchell”

4. Sibling of [name the Known Match’s parent]; ex: “Sibling of Martha SMITH”

The Tree “box” and spreadsheet “cell” would have these entries and appear very close to other, known, boxes and cells. They would also be more specific in the Tree index, instead of a generic “GUESS” or “Unknown”.

I think I like (4) Sibling of Known Match’s parent the best because it specifically precludes the Known Match’s parent. In fact, I just did one new Match who was 1C to two different Matches so the description was: [sibling of John and Mary SURNAME] to rule them both out [after checking with ProTools].

I am interested in feedback on this topic – i.e. how to efficiently document Matches which clearly fit in a specific Tree branch. I am experimenting with 1C1R and even some 2C which clearly cannot fit anywhere else. Keyword here is “efficiently” – there is a LOT to do, and I don’t want to have to write a paragraph about each one. This is primarily for my own research. If I leave them as alive, no one else will see them; and if I mark them as deceased, the only people who will care will be close relatives to the new Match, and they may provide some feedback to me. I hope so…

[22DH] Segment-ology: ProTools 26 – Documenting a GUESS by Jim Bartlett 20250302

ProTools Part 25

Featured

Posted on by
13

The Path Is Key

This may be an extension of my “genealogy sacrilege” outlook or rant.

But before I begin, to each their own – you get to choose your objectives.

My two main objectives are to get my genealogy right; and to get the Chromosome Map of segments from my Ancestors at each generation right. My objectives do not include finding all of the descendants of all of my Ancestors. However, I do think that documenting how my DNA Matches interrelate to me and each other is very helpful in achieving my two objectives – and this swells my Tree somewhat. I’m finding: Match paper trail paths (and ThruLines clues) that are impossible, given the DNA evidence; and DNA evidence that has revealed genealogy paths I never would have otherwise found (not just limited to breaking through brick walls).

So, a lot of work to do to document what will be over 10,000 Matches…  Time is precious…

When documenting DNA Matches and their line of descent from our MRCA to them, the “Path Is  Key”. Dotting all of the “i”s and crossing all the “t”s is NOT! The DNA segments do not “know” their hosts’ names (or dates, or places), just that the segments are passed along. We genealogists document what we can about each of these Match ancestor DNA hosts. It helps us keep track – in time and place. But how much effort do we need to put into documenting our Matches’ lines? My opinion is: not much! We need to be sure of the path. We don’t need to know the full names, or pet names, or titles. It’s nice to know the birth/death years, but how much digging should we do to find the complete birth date or place? What do we do when several different descendants insist on different given names … I could go on and on, but I’ve decided it’s not my job to adjudicate their family “wars” – my objective is to be clear of the path.

Therefore, I’m now using terms like Pvt, Unknown, GUESS, sibling of XYZ, etc. to describe Match Ancestors – particularly those close to the Match.I don’t really care about their parent’s or grandparent’s names or genealogy info – just the path that must exist for a DNA segment. [NB: proving a specific genealogy-DNA link is a separate issue; a potential path is not a proven path.]

I am still documenting the child and grandchild of the MRCA (given name and birth year at least). But, IMO, the further down the path from the MRCA to the Match, the less precise this info needs to be. The Key Is the Path. I don’t want to introduce incorrect info, so I’m introducing “other” terms in the name field when it is unclear, in debate, or might take days to research and resolve. I note the “path” that has to be and move on.This allows me to get as many DNA Matches as possible into the spreadsheet. Then the interrelationships can be better evaluated.

SUMMARY:  Don’t worry about “fully” documenting the MRCA-to-Match path; just that the path does exist, and no incorrect info is introduced (unless your Tree is private). And, of course, it’s up to your own judgment as to if/how much of this recommendation to follow. My plan is to get as many Matches as possible into MRCA family groups in a spreadsheet, and then study the interrelationships with ProTools. Get Matches in my Tree and my Common Ancestor spreadsheet, but “do no harm”.

[22DG] Segment-ology: ProTools 25 – The Path Is Key by Jim Bartlett 20250222