Ken Buchanan vs. Ismael Laguna I: My thoughts

I finally came across a copy of the first Buchanan-Laguna fight, a fight I had been trying to find for quite some time.

Despite the fact that it is a smudgy black and white and missing the first few seconds of each round with Spanish broadcasting overriding English commentary, it doesn't stop me from treating the fight like a prized new born child. (The fact that the Spanish commentary overrides Howard Cossell's commentary is only coincidental to my liking the fight, I assure you ).

Now, down to the fight itself: just wonderful stuff.

Much like the second fight it's one of those really enjoyable boxing matches with masterful skills from both men. Laguna is as slippery as an eel moving in out and with perfect fluidity, Ken is sticking out a hard jab and looking to force exchanges where his toughness can shine through.

Much like the second fight, the first fight follows a similar pattern: Laguna owns the early rounds, the middle rounds are shared and Buchanan comes home with a wet sail .... well almost.

Laguna is a little sharper in this one, flashing the form that saw him bamboozle Carlos Ortiz over 15 rounds in the first meeting of their trilogy. Buchanan is a little bit more raw, not as seasoned and doesn't handle the elements all that well. Of coruse, that's nothing too surprising, a Scotsman in Puerto Rico on a hot day is bound to feel the pinch.

Despite this adversity he presses the fight well down the stretch, ignoring the cut and swelling under his lead eye, and he takes 4 of the last 6 rounds to make the fight close.

Despite his late rally, I felt it wasn't quite enough and Laguna had done enough to win the fight. I should put my cards on the table, I am more a fan of Laguna's style of fighting than Buchanan's, and that probably swayed me a little in the scoring, enough so to have Laguna ahead. (I for instance only had Ken winning by a point in the second Laguna fight, even though most had it a tad wider than that).

My card read Laguna winning 144-141.


I had Buchanan winning rounds 1,6,10,12,13 and 14. I had Laguna winning rounds 2,3,4,5,7,8,9,11 and 15.


A few of the middle rounds were close, and could have gone Ken's way, and I am fine with a slender points win for Ken, but I think 1 or 2 points tops would be the go.


I'm not surprised that Ken got the nod in the end. The Puerto Rican crowd were actually behind him would you believe and cheering all his punches, even some of the missed ones!


Laguna had every right to be disappointed with the decision, he did fight his heart out, and I think he put on a gutsy effort in the very last round, potshotting whilst dog tired and catching Ken enough times to steal the round - something he was unable to do with the resolute Buchanan in the rematch.


Anyway, that's how I saw it. Hopefully the Brits on this forum don't view this post as being sacriligeous, demythologising one of the best wins away from home a fighter has ever had. Ken does have an argument for winning the fight, I just don't think he did enough. I don't begrudge him the win though, an excellent effort overall. :good

 

You can if you contact Raging(_)Bull.

 

Please do if you find the time :good

Laguna is indeed an underrated fighter. He's known more for his losses to the likes of Ortiz, Buchanan, Elorde and Saldivar, but I've only ever really seen him be convincingly beaten once, against Ortiz in their third fight. He also faced Locche and held his own, which should tell you something about this guy. Top shelf boxer, capable of consistently mixing it with the best.

 

You mean er, Puerto Rico right?

 

Probably my all time worst commentator. I find him more annoying than even Lampley on a nuthug.

Mantequilla is yours a colour copy? I've seen some images from this fight that appear to be taken in colour from a hand held camera, just wondering if the whole fight was snapped in colour or not.

 

I agree with you. Prime Merchant was good stuff with the special comments too.