Note: The FTF (Fight The Fight) bonus system uses many creative award categories. Each term below would benefit from a precise operational definition to ensure bonuses are awarded consistently and fairly across all fights. They are grouped by theme for clarity.

• Fastest Hands: Recognizes a fighter with exceptional hand speed, but needs clear criteria (e.g. measured punch speed or volume) to avoid subjective judgment of who truly had the “fastest” hands in a fight.
• Cleanest Power Strike: Awards the most impactful clean hit, which is ambiguous without defining “clean” and “power strike.” A precise definition is needed to determine which strike landed flush with significant forceboxbets.co.uk, rather than relying on subjective impressions of impact.
• Most Significant Strikes Landed: Rewards landing high-impact strikes, but “significant strike” must be defined (for example, strikes that land with power at range). Without a clear definition, judges might disagree on what counts towards this totalfightthefight.live.
• Most Effective Combos: Honors the use of effective multi-strike combinations. A definition is needed for “effective combination” – whether it means a high count of consecutive hits, variety of techniques, or a combo leading to a visible advantage – so that all evaluators use the same criteria.
• Technical Offense: Intended to reward skilled offensive technique, but “technical” offense can be interpreted broadly. A strict definition is required to distinguish it from general effective offensefightthefight.live – for example, specifying elements like accuracy, form, and strategic execution of attacks.
• Technical Fighter: An overall award for the fighter with the best technical skill. Without clear metrics (e.g. scoring on form, footwork, defense, and offense quality), this broad term could be applied inconsistentlyfightthefight.live. It needs criteria to quantify “well-rounded application of technical skills,” as described by the eventfightthefight.live.
• Most Technical Striker: Focuses on striking technique excellence. This term requires definition of what makes a striker “most technical” – such as superior form, precision, and variety of strikes – so that it isn’t just a subjective impression.
• Most Technical Footwork: Rewards exemplary footwork technique. Since there is also a general “Footwork” category, the specific meaning of “technical footwork” must be clarifiedfightthefight.live. Clear parameters (like efficient movement, positioning, and balance) are needed to differentiate it from the basic footwork award.
• Footwork: Recognizes outstanding movement in the ring, but needs defined metrics. Judges must agree on what constitutes superior footwork (e.g. evasive movement, ring cutting, stance switching) to apply this bonus uniformly.
• Power Striker of the Event: A special event-wide award for a fighter combining high strike volume with powerfightthefight.live. The term requires definition of how to balance volume vs. power – for instance, whether a flurry of moderately hard shots outweighs a lower volume of very heavy shots – so that “power striker” is judged consistently.

• Technical Defense: Awards the fighter with the most skillful defensive technique. “Technical defense” must be defined (e.g. effective use of blocking, parrying, head movement, etc.) to ensure all judges evaluate defensive prowess in the same way and not just on lack of getting hitfightthefight.live.
• Head Movement: Rewards a fighter’s evasive head maneuvers to avoid strikes. A clear definition is needed (such as frequency and success of slips/weaves) because otherwise it’s subjective how much head movement (and of what quality) qualifies as the “best.”
• Most Avoided Strikes: Highlights defensive success by counting how many opponent strikes were evaded. This requires defining whether “avoided” means dodged, blocked, or both, and how to quantify avoidance. Without a set definition or statistical measure, different observers might have varying countsfightthefight.live.
• Best Gas Tank: Rewards superior endurance/cardio. The term “gas tank” (stamina) needs a clear benchmark – for example, maintaining high output in later rounds or quick recovery between rounds – to consistently determine who had the “best” endurance in an event.
• H2O Bonus: A unique hydration-related award meant to recognize “prime hydration performance”fightthefight.live. Since it’s still “under construction”fightthefight.live, a precise definition is needed (e.g. meeting specific rehydration targets or avoiding dehydration issues). Clear criteria would prevent confusion about how a fighter earns this water-incentive bonus.

• Aggression: In judging, effective aggression is a subjective criterion. This bonus needs a strict definition of what counts as “aggression” – for instance, merely moving forward or actually pressuring and landing strikes. Without it, one judge might reward sheer forward movement while another looks for landed punches behind that aggressionboxbets.co.uk.
• Ring Control: Also known as ring generalship, it refers to controlling the fight’s pace and space. A precise definition is required (e.g. dominance of the center, dictating distance and positioningboxbets.co.uk) so that all officials agree on what constitutes superior ring control.
• Cleanest Power Strike: Emphasizes a single powerful strike landed most cleanly. Terms like “clean” (undeflected and impactful) and “power” need clarification. Without defining these, picking the cleanest power strike could become subjective, as observers might differ on which punch was flush or powerful enoughboxbets.co.uk.
• Most Significant Strikes Landed: Tied to effective striking, this category hinges on what “significant strikes” include. A definition (perhaps aligning with a standard like power strikes thrown at distance) is needed to ensure everyone counts the same kinds of strikes toward this bonus. Otherwise, it’s unclear and inconsistent (since not all strikes are equal in scoring impact).
• Most Avoided Strikes: (See also in Defensive & Physical section.) As a scoring-related metric for defense, it requires clear definition to objectively score a fighter’s defensive prowess. Judges must agree on the avoidance criteria – e.g. counting only clean misses forced by defense – to use this in scoring fairly.

• Fight IQ of the Event: Intended for the fighter who showed exceptional fight intelligence. “Fight IQ” encompasses strategic decision-making and adaptability, which are hard to measure without set criteria. A clear definition (such as smart game-plan execution, adjustments, and efficient tactics) is needed to consistently identify the fighter with the highest ring intelligence.
• Best Adjustment Mid-Fight: Rewards the most effective strategic change during a fight. Judges need a defined standard for what constitutes the “best adjustment” – for example, a fighter noticeably shifting tactics after losing early rounds and then gaining advantage. Without explicit criteria, different observers might each have their own idea of what a remarkable mid-fight adjustment looks like.
• Victory Through Coaching: Recognizes a win achieved by heeding coaching advicefightthefight.live. It requires defining how to identify that a fighter’s responsiveness to their corner was pivotal. Without clear parameters (e.g. a visible strategy change after corner advice leading directly to victory), determining if a win was “through coaching” could be very subjective.
• Most Effective Fighter Member Coaching: This award’s intent is ambiguous and needs definition. It likely honors a fighter or team member who provided excellent coaching to another fighter. Clear criteria should specify whether it rewards a fighter who acted as a coach for a teammate or a coach who is a fighter-member, and how to measure coaching effectiveness (perhaps corner advice that visibly improved the fighter’s performance). Without definition, it’s unclear who qualifies and on what basis.

• Most Improved Fighter: Rewards the fighter who showed the greatest improvement, presumably since a prior event or over a season. A precise definition is needed to measure improvement – for instance, comparing fight performance metrics or outcomes from previous fights to the current one. Without clear benchmarks (e.g. improvement in technique, record, or conditioning), deciding who is “most improved” becomes subjective.
• Most Improved Gastank: Focuses on improved cardio endurance compared to before. “Gastank” refers to stamina; to award this, one must define the baseline and the period of comparison (e.g. improvement since the last fight or training camp). Clear criteria (such as increase in output without tiring, or lasting longer at high pace) are required so the selection isn’t arbitrary.
• H2O Bonus: (See also in Defensive & Physical section.) As a preparation/health category, it needs explicit metrics. For instance, if it’s about hydration compliance, the organizers must define how they assess “hydration performance” (blood tests, weight cut management, etc.). Without this, the bonus is ill-defined and cannot be awarded consistentlyfightthefight.live.

• Fight of the Event: Granted to the most outstanding fight of the night/event. Even the organizers note this is “not easy to define, but you’ll know it when you see it”fightthefight.live, highlighting the need for objective criteria. A clear definition (considering excitement, skill shown, back-and-forth action, crowd response, etc.) is required so that everyone agrees on which fight truly deserves this honor.
• Knockout of the Event: Recognizes the most impressive knockout. Without defining what makes a knockout “of the event” (e.g. fastest KO, most spectacular technique, or high stakes moment), judges might each favor different aspects. A consistent definition (such as degree of difficulty or dramatic effect of the KO) is needed to pick the winner uniformly.
• Surprise Win: Essentially an “upset” award for an unexpected victory. Criteria must clarify what qualifies as a surprise – for example, a lower-ranked fighter beating a top contender or a come-from-behind win. Without this, the term “surprise” is subjective; a clear definition based on ranking differences or odds would standardize the award.
• Most Effective Comeback: Honors a fighter who was nearly defeated but turned the fight around to win. A precise definition is needed to quantify a “comeback” – e.g. losing on points or nearly finished, then securing a win. Clear thresholds (such as being down on all scorecards before rallying) would make this award consistently applied, rather than relying on vague impressions of a comeback.
• Shock of the Event: Highlights a single shocking moment or result in the eventfightthefight.live. This could range from an upset outcome to an unusual incident, so it absolutely needs definition. Organizers should specify what kinds of “shocks” qualify (major upsets, dramatic finishes, controversies, etc.) to ensure the award is given for a comparable shock each time, not just any surprise event.
• Most Robbed Loser: Intended for a fighter who lost a decision that many feel they should have won. The term “robbed” is inherently subjective, so a clear standard is required (for instance, a consensus of media or fan scoring disagreeing with judges). Without defined criteria (like a threshold of disagreement in scoring), this award could be inconsistently or controversially awarded.
• Best Loss in a War: Rewards a fighter who lost but performed brilliantly in an all-out “war” (an extremely intense, competitive fight). Since “war” is slang, the award needs definition – perhaps based on high punch counts, both fighters hurt, and narrow scoring. Clear guidelines would ensure that the best losing effort in a barn-burner is recognized in a uniform way, rather than based on vague admiration.
• Best Round in a Lost Fight: Highlights a single round won by a fighter who ultimately lost the match, where that round was outstanding. It needs a defined basis for “best round” – e.g. a round where the losing fighter dominated or showcased exceptional skill. Without specifying if it’s based on dominance, excitement, or technical brilliance, different judges might pick different rounds, so a firm definition is necessary.

• Heart: Recognizes exceptional courage, resilience, or fighting spirit. “Heart” is an intangible quality, so it demands a clear definition or set of indicators (such as fighting effectively through adversity, overcoming knockdowns, etc.). Otherwise, awarding “heart” could be very subjective, as each person might have a different sense of who showed the most grit.
• Show of Class: Intended to reward sportsmanship or respect (for example, gracious behavior in victory or defeat). This category involves behavior outside pure performance, so it needs explicit criteria. Without defining what actions constitute a “show of class” – like helping an opponent up, respectful conduct, or humility – judges might have inconsistent interpretations. (Notably, this award is given as many smaller bonuses to multiple fightersfightthefight.live, making consistent standards even more important for fairness.)

• Most Effective Fighter Promoter: Rewards a fighter’s personal promotion of the event (e.g. selling tickets or social media buzz). “Effective promotion” must be defined with measurable metricsfightthefight.live – such as number of tickets sold, engagement metrics, or new fans attracted. A clear definition prevents this $5,000 bonus from being decided by vague popularity impressions.
• Most Effective Friends & Family – Fighter Promoter: Similar to the above, but for a fighter’s family/friends group promoting the eventfightthefight.live. It needs criteria for what counts as the most effective support-based promotion – for instance, community outreach or referral sign-ups. Without clear measures (like referral counts or promotional events held), it would be hard to judge which family/friend group truly deserves this award.
• Most Creative & Effective Promoting: Awards the fighter’s camp or family who comes up with the most creative promotion strategy that also succeeds in boosting the eventfightthefight.live. Terms like “creative” are subjective, so this requires defined judging criteria (originality of promotional idea, reach achieved, etc.). A precise definition ensures that judges consistently reward both creativity and effectiveness, rather than one judge favoring sheer creativity and another favoring raw numbers.