Hi Bill. Still puzzling on this myself. Am thinking that there are at least two totally separate perspectives. Your example falls into my Category 1.
Category 1. Where FF matches are connected by paper trail to a specific ancestral couple. I say "couple" because we don't know if the matching segment came from the husband or the wife.
This category should also include yDNA Lineage based studies using FF to decipher the lost paper trails of families known to share a common ancestor. This requires an analytic tool not currently offered by FTDNA - the ability to compare FF results when FTDNA has not declared a match.
I think that each of these match sets warrants a separate project - which FTDNA seems to be willing to setup - as you have done. At this stage, I am handling my match set in the surname project - as it was "empty".
I have prepared a first cut of a table showing what I have found on my matches for Henry Tidmore (1761-1853) m Margaret Brazeale: http://www.worldfamilies.net/surnames/tidmore/ff
Category 2. An individual's matches - particularly those that can't be specifically put into a Category 1 study. I am expecting to have multiple 100s of matches on each om my 3 FF tests - so this isn't a trivial issue! (I tested my Mother and my Dad instead of myself - plus I tested my wife)
FTDNA has setup FF projects for each of my 3 FF tests - though I don't yet see any advantages vs the individual info.
At this point, I am waiting to see what tools and resources FTDNA is going to provide - as I can then decide what, if anything, is needed to supplement the FTDNA resources. Then, I'll consider whether WorldFamilies should be offering special resources for other users.
I am looking at 3 main issues which I hope FTDNA will address:
A. Strong enough tracking tools that I don't have to operate a separate spread sheet to keep up with what I know about my FF matches
B. Easier evaluation tools to simplify the analyses that I am doing. I am finding that there are often multiple FF Tests matching at a shared segment. And - I am expecting that triangulation of matches and paper trails will be MUCH MORE powerful than head to head matches - both in defining the full ancestral segment and in increasing confidence in determining which is the MOST RECENT ANCESTRAL COUPLE (MRAC). I am working with the 1+cM tool for much of this work. It is really tedious to identify all of the segments where there is a match and then evaluate which of the other FF tests who also match at that segment
C. Ability to compare results that "should" match - but don't meet FTDNA's threshhold matching criteria. (Unless FTDNA calls it a match - we can't use the chromosome matching tool.)
I would love to get examples of how other researchers are presenting their research - in both categories