What is the highest fitness score possible on Strava?

Organon wrote:

My Veloviewer score is 99.935 if anyone cares.

smashing it, mine is 99.350 I thought I was doing well.

In order to get a fitness score I’d have to wear my HRM every ride, and I just can’t be bothered. Normally put it on for a zwift session, but out on the roads, I normally don’t bother.

Mine is consistently around

Mine is consistently around 100, as the rides I do are consistently 100-150 relative effort.  It’s to do with the effort put in compared to your FTP (or heartrate equivalent), and the time it’s over.  1 hour at FTP would be 100, but Strava uses something different based on heart rate.  The fitness score decays over time, but relatively slowly (42 days I think)  The fatigue score is also based on recent relative effort, but decays more quickly (7 days I think), and form is the balance between the two.  The idea is to manage this balance.  It’s explained on TrainingPeaks.

 There probably is a maximum fitness based on maintaining a high relative effort over many days. For me, a 100k in a little under 4 hours gets into the 400s for relative effort.  Getting more than 100 for an hour based on FTP does indeed suggest that the FTP is wrong, so Strava must be getting something wrong for my intensity score (too high).

My highest is 104, I’ll

My highest is 104, I’ll generally hit 90-100 at the end of a training block before it drops back down during recovery week and the process starts again.

Even though I’m pretty meticulous with my numbers, I’ve stopped worrying about it over anything other than a 1-3 month view.  Right now I’ve just started another training block and am at 82, lower than it was around the time I did my first imperial century.  I’m substantially faster now than I was then (averaging >30kph vs ~20kph), but my overall graph shows roughly flat since then (with some peaks and troughs, but never going too far either way).

So yeah, not entirely sure it works over the longer term.

Another runner/part time

Another runner/part time cyclist here – I usually peak about 150, ATM it’s in the 130s, seldom goes below 120. Doesn’t seem to mean a huge amount to me – garmin based VO2max seems better…

I’d like to see a little more

I’d like to see a little more of the algorithm used to calculate it to be honest.  At the moment I’m pretty much as bike-fit as I’ve ever been, I’ve done a record amount of miles this year and I’m on 47, down from a peak of 59 in late October.

It’s difficult to tell but I get the distinct impression that I get more ‘credit’ for a three-hour tempo ride with Mrs JGV where I’m hardly out of breath, than an hour’s solid Zwift workout that’s building strength and ability to clear lactate and so on.  All these things are just numbers of course, and more is better but it would be good to understand what you’re supposed to do or not do.

As others have said not sure

As others have said not sure of the accuracy, I hadn’t looked at it for ages until I read this post and then pleasantly surprised to see I got a best of 98 this Sunday