The daily maximum is the sum of the highest accepted answer value on each of the seven questions. It is a scoring ceiling for that board, not a target selected from the number of people playing and not a measure of the most points actually earned so far.
That definition gives you a useful denominator. A raw total tells you what you banked; dividing it by the maximum tells you how much of the board's available score you captured.
Calculate the ceiling question by question
Imagine a hypothetical three-question game whose highest values are 120, 150 and 100. Its maximum would be 370. You would not use the highest single answer, multiply your own best round by three, or add all the accepted alternatives together.
A round accepts one locked answer, so only one maximum per question belongs in the calculation. The daily has seven such rounds. The same arithmetic can apply to shorter practice packs, although those are not ranked daily results.
In the current Footbillion question bank, every daily question has a highest value of 150. The seven-question daily maximum is therefore 1,050. It is important not to claim that current daily ceilings vary simply because the selected questions change. A future bank with different per-question maxima could produce different ceilings; the displayed maximum remains the number to use.
Turn a total into a percentage
Take an illustrative result of 630 against the current maximum of 1,050. Divide 630 by 1,050 and multiply by 100: the result is 60%. This is a share of available points.
It is not an accuracy rate. You could reach a total through several different combinations of positive scores and zeroes. It is not a leaderboard percentile either. The leaderboard guide explains why position depends on other completed entries, whereas this calculation uses only your score and the board ceiling.
Keep those measures separate in your notes. “60% of available points” is a precise statement. “Better than 60% of players” requires information this calculation does not provide.
Look underneath the percentage
The round chart tells you why the total took its shape. Three zeroes and four large values suggest a different decision pattern from seven moderate values, even if the totals happen to match.
Ask whether a zero came from missing knowledge, misreading a condition, a rejected spelling, passing or running out of time. Then ask whether a valid low-value answer was a conscious safe choice. That distinction is more useful than simply wishing every bar were taller.
A risk budget across seven rounds can help you decide where to pursue a less obvious answer and where to protect eligibility. Fixed editorial values provide the scoring framework, but they do not tell you your personal probability of answering correctly.
Keep comparisons modest
A higher share of the maximum does not prove that a later board was easier or that you have improved by exactly the same percentage. Different prompts can fit your memory differently. Treat a run of results as observations, not a controlled experiment.
Your record supplies recent completed totals. If you want a detailed personal log, save the current report's denominator and your own notes while they are visible; do not assume the history list reconstructs every analytical measure for you.
Play a match, then read the total and ceiling as a pair. The maximum is most useful when it helps you describe the result accurately and choose one concrete improvement for the next session.
