This ends up being confusing. Take one apart and look at the mechanism....or even look at Ruger Ad-copy with an X-ray view of the internals. Here's the deal which can be confusing. The gun is SAO. When the slide is racked back and released, the hammer is rotated back ( for sake of argument, "fully"....but let's say it's 90 degrees). When you pull the trigger,....yes, the trigger rocks back more, but only a BIT more....say to 91-93 degrees. This is due to the hammer/sear interface which is not perfectly "square" surfaces between these 2 pieces, but each is a bit angled to create a "locking" effect between the 2 mating surfaces...so the hammer has less of a chance to be jarred off the sear. This is COMPLETLEY DIFFERENT...than (say) a Glock, where the slide action compresses the striker spring about 60%....and pulling the trigger compresses the striker spring, the remaining 40%. Or even compared to a Kahr pistol where pulling the trigger compresses the spring from zero to 100% and it then releases (DAO). The MAX has it's spring pretty much "fully-compressed" after the slide action cocks the pistol. And then this point---> yes, MAX
does have a half-cock notch between the hammer and sear. If after all this....if the hammer should ever slip off the sear without consciously pulling the trigger,.... it will be arrested half-way down by this half-cock notch... and will not strike the primer.
Just to illustrate....here's an article describing the 3 ways a hammer/sear interface can exist....positive / negative / neutral. MAX has "positive" angles --->
https://jovianthunderbolt.blogspot.com/2018/01/searhammer-engagement.html
With "positive" sear engagement geometry,... the hammer will always rock back a bit from it's "true" full-cocked position when pulling the trigger.