Turning mixed activity into one score: a worked example

This article walks through a hypothetical competition week with every hard case included: a participant doing several different activities, one with missing data, and one going well past the cap. The purpose is not to hand down a “correct answer” but to show how the formula handles each case.

Setup

Three people in one team, week 3 of the challenge. The conversion factors were published in week 1:

These factors are invented for the example so the arithmetic is easy to follow. They are not derived from MET values. For factors that follow the public Compendium of Physical Activities, the ratios to brisk walking (4.8 METs) are about 1.8 for running at 5.0 to 5.2 mph (8.5 METs) and between 0.8 and 1.4 for leisure cycling depending on speed (4.0 METs under 10 mph, 6.8 METs at 10 to 11.9 mph); see our scoring article. We did not check swimming’s Compendium entry, so 1.8 is an illustration only.

Formula: points = minutes × factor, rounded down. Personal cap 43 points per day. Half of whatever exceeds the cap (rounded down) goes into the team pool; the other half is not scored.

Raw data

Person A — consistent, several activities:

• Monday: running 35 minutes
• Wednesday: cycling 60 minutes
• Friday: swimming 25 minutes

Person B — one day of missing data:

• Tuesday: brisk walking 50 minutes
• Thursday: running 40 minutes
• Sunday: trained, but the watch did not sync and the entry arrived 4 days late

Person C — a single very heavy day:

• Saturday: running 150 minutes

Working through each person

Person A

Raw total 149. Did any day exceed the 43 cap? Monday was 56 — 13 over, Wednesday was 48 — 5 over, Friday was 45 — 2 over. Total excess: 20 points, halved into the team pool gives 10.

Personal points: 43 + 43 + 43 = 129.

Person B

Sunday: the entry arrived 4 days late, past the published 72-hour deadline. Under the rule, the late entry is excluded from this week but logged so the organisers can review it. Personal points: 43 + 43 = 86. Excess this week: 7 + 21 = 28, halved gives 14 into the team pool.

Person C

Saturday, 150 minutes of running. Raw: 150 × 1.6 = 240. Far past the cap: 240 − 43 = 197 counts as excess, halved gives 98 into the team pool.

Personal points: 43.

Team total

• Person A: 129
• Person B: 86
• Person C: 43
• Team pool from excess: 10 + 14 + 98 = 122

Team score = (129 + 86 + 43 + 122) / 3 = 380 / 3 ≈ 126.7

What this example shows

Person C trained 150 minutes in one day yet contributed no more than Person A’s three light sessions. That is deliberate: the cap protects newcomers from being left far behind, while the team pool keeps a reward for heavy effort — at team level, not at individual level.

If your team finds that unfair, there are two honest options:

1. Raise the cap and accept a wider points gap between members.
2. Drop the cap and score within ability groups instead, so newcomers compete against newcomers.

Both are reasonable. What is not reasonable is keeping a low cap while still advertising the challenge as “fair to people who train a lot” — participants will work that out within two weeks.

Checking your own formula

Four points to check before you apply it:

• Where is the rounding done? (Above: rounded down on each line, not on the total.)
• Does the cap apply per day or per session? (Above: per day.)
• Is the excess capped at anything? (Above: uncapped — worth considering, since someone training for four hours can lift a team very quickly.)
• Are late entries excluded or penalised? (Above: excluded from the week and logged.)
• Is the halved excess rounded? (Above: rounded down, so 197 / 2 = 98.)

Sources

• Compendium of Physical Activities, walking / running / bicycling — reference MET ratios quoted in the note under the factor table; the factors in the worked example are not derived from them (opened 2026-10-31)
• WHO, Physical activity fact sheet — intensity categories and the 150-minute weekly figure (opened 2026-10-28)