A Brief Overview of the Maximon Global Scoring Methodology

The most common question we get at Maximon Global is “how do you define fitness?”  In order to answer this question, let’s first provide some background.  Webster’s Dictionary defines fitness as “the quality or state of being fit.”  To dial things in a bit more, fit is defined as “sound physically and mentally.”  For most in the sporting world, these definitions fail to express what many see as fit.  As a corollary, this makes measuring fitness even more problematic–we simply have no consensus on what it means, looks like, and feels to be “fit.”  At our core, Maximon Global hopes to change this.  

For many, the tennis great Rafal Nadal epitomizes fitness with the adjectives power and stamina often used to describe him.  Obviously, Nadal possesses great skill and athleticism, but his superior fitness is frequently credited for his victories over other competitors.  Others point to the great Kenyan marathoner Eliud Kipchoge, a two-time Olympic champion and the first person to break the two-hour barrier in the marathon as the epitome of fitness.  Articles cite his laser focus and endurance as factors contributing to his excellence.  An athlete like Jackie Joyner-Kersee, a three-time Olympic gold medalist and Sports Illustrated for Women’s Greatest Female Athlete of All-Time, possesses a blend of strength, stamina, and power.  Joyner-Kersee’s endurance cannot be disputed either as she competed in the grueling eight-event heptathlon.  Athletes like this provide an excellent basis for beginning to formulate a working definition of fitness.

Defining Fitness

Prior to creating a methodology for quantifying fitness, we needed to first define it.  To do so, we polled a variety of athletes, coaches, exercise physiologists, and other fitness professionals.  A consensus of the most important and impactful components of fitness were revealed:

• Cardiovascular Endurance/Aerobic Capacity
• Anaerobic Capacity
• Muscular Strength and Balance, by balance we mean strength in proper proportions.  For example, an athlete that bench presses more than they deadlift or squat is not balanced.
• Muscular Strength Endurance
• Comprehensive Power, comprehensive power is essentially an event that ties the other components together.

With the various components of fitness determined, we repolled our group to determine guidelines for selecting appropriate fitness tests.  A consensus on the following points revealed itself, some of which overlap:

• Recognize that no perfect test of fitness exists and that everyone will never agree on a single definition of fitness as their personal priorities about fitness dictate their measures of fitness.
• Select events that simultaneously test several aspects of fitness.
• Tests should consist of common, familiar events with easily accessible and understandable measures.
• Events that require specialized technique or athleticism should be avoided and if impossible to avoid, should only test athleticism indirectly.
• Reduce the reliance on human judging as legal lifts vary from judge to judge and competition to competition.  Have clear and consistent standards for clean lifts.
• Avoid very technical lifts as one athlete may lift a significantly larger amount at a similar strength level as another if they have spent years perfecting the form.
• If performing multiple tests, enough time should be allotted for recovery and proper warmup between tests.
• A fitness competition should not favor any one type of athlete.
• In order to score well overall, an athlete should be well rounded (balanced).
• When performing multiple tests, total event time should be as consistent as possible across competitions and performed over a reasonable period of time.
• Tests should offer the ability to compare yourself against a variety of competitors across the world, including professional athletes.
• Results should be backed by data and show where an athlete can improve with targeted strategies.  
• Environmental factors impact athletic performance.
• Avoid non-performance metrics like body composition.
• Avoid skill related fitness metrics.
• For strength tests, usage of benchmark lifts is ideal, especially in cases where the lifter’s proficiency in the lift serves as a good indication of strength in the area measured.
• Mobility is a better measure of fitness than flexibility–flexibility is dependent upon what you need the flexibility for.
• Functional and skill fitness measures like flexibility, balance, agility, and coordination are less important than measures of power, strength, stamina, and endurance.
• No surprises, athletes should know and be able to prepare in advance for the tests used in any fitness measurement. 
• Tests should be relatively simple to perform.
• Strength tests should have a clearly defined form and range of motion.
• Tests using specialized equipment should be avoided as athletes may be unfamiliar with equipment that varies from gym to gym.
• Strength tests should be suitable or 1 repetition maximum efforts and should be able to be progressed in small weight increments indefinitely.  
• Many exercises are excellent training modalities, but are imperfect testing modalities.

Selecting Fitness Tests

The guidelines discussed above formed the basis for Maximon Global’s selection of the following events:

• One Mile/1500 Run for measuring Cardiovascular Endurance/Aerobic Capacity.
• 500 Meter Erg for measuring Anaerobic Capacity.
• Bench Press, Overhead Press, Squat, and Deadlift for measuring Muscular Strength and Balance.
• Pull ups and Farmer’s Walk for measuring Muscular Strength Endurance.
• Barbell Thrusters for measuring Comprehensive Power

There is overlap between certain tests and Maximon Global’s scoring algorithm recognizes and accounts for this situation.  While these tests are not perfect measures of each individual component, the need to perform nine events over a relatively short period of time precluded more lengthy alternatives.    

Establishing a Scoring Methodology 

Through rigorous analysis, Maximon Global created a series of scoring algorithms to quantify athlete’s performances across the world.  These algorithms use a variety of factors to assign a numerical value ranging from 0 to 1500 to an athlete’s individual test performance, thus allowing competition to occur without traditional constraints.  While the company does not publish the specific algorithms due to competitive reasons, we do explain aspects of our formula for descriptive purposes.  We provide examples in the extreme to illustrate these aspects and to show how it is possible for athletes to compete across time, distance, age, and gender against one another.    

To provide competitors with some understanding of our scoring algorithm, we will detail some components below including the importance of Crowdsourced Performance Information, the impact of Environmental Conditions on exercise performance, a basic use of Statistical Modelling in performance, and a discussion regarding the Allocation of Points by Fitness Component and Individual Test Proportions in relation to the overall score.

Again, to prevent athletes from “gaming the system,” we do not release the complete algorithm–the best way to improve your score is to simply increase your performance.  We provide suggestions and best practices under the Takeaways section below.  Our algorithms utilize the latest advancements in data science, statistical modeling, exercise science, machine learning, and artificial intelligence while balancing them against real-world performance and conditions.  This is not an exhaustive list of the measurement techniques that we use.  As advances in these fields continue to occur, our algorithms remain under continual refinement.      

Crowdsourced Performance Information

Presently a comprehensive repository for human performance data does not exist.  A variety of international and national federations have a variety of rules and records making it difficult to compare one performance to the next even in the same event.  If you want to compare across different sports, for example, powerlifting and indoor rowing, the task becomes even more challenging.  If you wish to break your results down by age, gender, or other factors the task becomes more burdensome.  

Maximon Global seeks to change this by creating a searchable, sortable data set of test results presented with interactive visualizations.  So if you just got on your rowing machine and ripped out a 500, and you’re a 60 year old female, you might just wonder how you stack up against people your age, or against people in your area, or maybe even if you are better (relatively) than your 30 year old daughter.  Perhaps you are the same person and now wonder how your bench press stacks up.  Maximon Global’s Crowdsourced Performance Database provides the answer.  

As our database increases, our algorithms become more accurate and our competitors gain valuable, actionable insights.  By joining our social network, athletes gain access to improved and centralized training information and tools designed to positively impact their results.  

Environmental Conditions

If we wish to test the aerobic capacity of two athletes on opposite sides of the world using the one mile run, environmental conditions must be observed, recorded, and factored into any scoring analysis.  Assuming for illustration two athletes of equal size and age.  Athlete One is running in a hot and humid climate with measurable pollution while Athlete Two is running in ideal conditions with limited pollution.  Now let’s say Athlete One runs the mile in 6:00, while Athlete Two comes in at 6:02.  

At first glance, it would seem Athlete One by virtue of running two seconds faster possesses a greater aerobic capacity.  However, anyone with experience running knows that heat, humidity, and pollution negatively impacted Athlete Two.  Studies indicate that had the two athletes competed under the same environmental conditions, Athlete Two would perform faster and thus be considered to possess a higher aerobic capacity.  Making things worse for Athlete Two, she ran into a severe headwind.  So, if we wish to compare athletes across the world, any scoring methodology must account and adjust for real-time local conditions.  Maximon Global does this by using nearly 80 factors in our environmental condition corrections.  As a result, our scoring algorithm adjusts raw performance results to account for these differences.  That said, remember that your actual result (raw performance) is the single greatest determinant of your score for a particular test.         

Statistical Modeling

Increasingly, exercise scientists recognize the importance of body size as a confounding influence in the analysis of physiological function.  Power function models, for example, continue to advance and represent a statistically superior method of scaling physiological variables for differences in body size.  As a result, modeling permits meaningful comparisons between various body sizes.  Let’s describe such a scenario below.      

Imagine Athlete One, a 150 lb. female and Athlete Two, a 110 lb. female, they are both competing in a pullup contest and agree to use this test to determine who possesses superior upper body strength.  Both athletes possess equal measures with all other variables.  Athlete One completes twelve repetitions, while Athlete Two completes thirteen repetitions.  At first glance, Athlete Two wins with a superior performance (raw score) of 13 vs. 12.  However, simple physics tells us Athlete One, at 30 lbs. heavier, performed significantly more work.  Examine the math:

Now if we are using pull ups to measure upper body strength between the two athletes, it is clear that Athlete One lifted much more weight in total. 

In summary, statistical modeling assists us to develop a clearer picture when comparing an athlete’s performance.  Keep in mind, this example is for illustrative purposes and is not representative of how Maximon Global calculates points in our pull up tests–your raw result (actual performance) is the most important factor.  In fact, pull ups are not used purely as a measure of strength in our competitions and this result is used in several of our calculations.  So in an event like pull ups, repetitions, body weight, and total weight lifted are among several factors used to create a final test score.    

Allocation of Points by Fitness Component and Individual Test Proportions

The determination of the allocation of points by fitness component (aerobic capacity, anaerobic capacity, muscular strength, strength endurance, and comprehensive power) are not released for competitive purposes.  These allocations are primarily determined by our advisory panel of exercise scientists, coaches, and former athletes who represent a wide cross section of sports and disciplines.  

The allocation of individual test proportions are determined by subpanels, with members consisting of individuals with specific credentials in those types of events.  To elaborate, we use smaller groups with a particular expertise so a group of endurance coaches and athletes are not determining how points are allocated within the strength events. 

Takeaways:

We hope this document helps you in your preparation for Maximon Global Fitness Competitions.  Many athletes contact us looking for specific guidance and to preserve the integrity of competition, we do not release this information.  The following information serves as a basic guide for preparation:

• The single best strategy is to improve your raw result (actual performance) in each test.
• You need proficiency in all areas to win one of our fitness competitions.
• Results in one event sometimes impact results in another.  For example, as an imbalance between upper and lower body strength increases, it negatively affects an athlete’s overall score.  These imbalances are not limited to strength events only.
• If you skip leg day often in the gym, you’re going to struggle.
• A score of zero pull ups is disastrous.  
• Exceptionally poor performance in one fitness component should be improved.
• Exceptional performance in a single test or fitness component will not allow you to accumulate a reserve of points to defeat other competitors.  If you are an exceptionally fast miler, but lack strength, winning the event will prove difficult.  The same applies for strength based athletes, you will not be able to pile up enough points in the strength events to be able to walk the mile run and win.  Balance of results remains important.
• Mediocre or average performance on one test, with excellent results in the others makes for highly competitive overall scores.  In our testing of men, a sub 5 minute mile, a sub 1:25 500 erg, a 400 lb. deadlift/squat, and a 300 lb. bench press are rare and impressive individual test scores, although they remain far from world records.  Finding an individual who can reach all of these results in a single day–highly unusual, so a strength-based athlete who runs the mile closer to 9 minutes remains highly competitive.  
• On that note, most athlete’s have no clue what constitutes a mediocre performance.  Your stereotypical hulking powerlifter covers a mile far faster than the general public.  If you struggle to believe this, head to your local Walmart and get back to us.  
• There is proven value in conserving some energy in the early tests to ensure good scores in the later events.  For experienced athlete’s in a full nine-event competition, personal records are rare.  Keep grinding.  
• Multi-event competitions are grueling by nature, nutrition and hydration are especially important for success.
• While no fitness test achieves perfection, we believe our methodology comes as close as possible.  

We would like to conclude by thanking everyone for competing and contributing to the greater good.  We wish everyone the best of luck and we promise you, you’ll need it!