First, the Kentucky Round Robin is still not included in the ratings. As soon as that data becomes available, I will include it.
Second, I've taken down the weighted ratings for the time being. Though they produce a slightly more accurate prediction, a couple of factors have prompted me to put them on the back burner. Most important among these factors is that I've been trying to clean up the data set to make sure there are no mistakes. I have this year fairly well set, but haven't had time to work through past data. It's also a more complicated calculation and I want to think a bit more about how to best implement it.
Third, I've posted a neat little prediction calculator that tells you what result the system would predict based on the current ratings of two teams.
Fourth, I've required that the debaters must have traveled as partners together to at least 2 tournaments in order to be listed.
Harvard DH jumped considerably in the most recent ratings -- from 9th to 3rd -- bypassing even Michigan AP. This might be a surprise to some since they shared the same 7-1 prelim record and Michigan made it to Finals while Harvard lost in Semis.
I think that this example really shows the strength of Glicko ratings. Though Michigan made it to finals, I would argue that Harvard really had the better tournament in terms of their wins and losses. Of course, there are the obvious facts that Harvard won the head-to-head matchup against Michigan and that Harvard's only losses were to Northwestern MV. But more significantly, Harvard's average opponent had a rating of 1765 compared to Michigan's opponent rating of 1719. To put it in more concrete terms, Harvard's average opponent would have been slightly more than a 56:44 favorite over Michigan's average opponent.