Ken Buchanan vs. Nicolino Locche

Thanks for that, sounds like Fraser used the classic Gavin Rees title winning gameplan! Quality, it's definitely the right gameplan, and like i said before, Buchanan can mix it to both body and head whilst moving all the while, he is a man that can win this. But i just think that at his very best Locche can overcome even a bad styles match-up. Antonio Cervantes was a clever counter-puncher who wouldn't play right into his hands and Locche come out on top against him, even in the rematch he was doing the same for long periods. Though in my opinion Buchanan is better and more versatile in terms 9of effectiveness than Cervantes.

Based on a styles match-up, Buchanan might be favoured, i just think that Locche can't be written off regardless here, even with his comfort zone (limitations?), i think he is very capable of overcoming such. Buchanan is pure class though, and his ring generalship might even take it for him. I think its closer than people might, i'm more of a Buchanan fan than a Locche fan btw.

 

Napa doesnt really remind me of Locche to tell you the truth. Reminds more of a Lorenzo Parra defensively and off the top of my head maybe someone like Victor Burgos on the front foot .. Doesnt have the overall stationary defensive tools that Nicolino employed, and therefore seems to use his legs more.

In the Ballone and Bouziane he was often the aggressor ..Admittedly I havent seen much of him.

What were his fights that reminded you of Locche?

 

I saw Buchanan in the ring with Ismael Laguna and he did very well. Ken was a boxer and a good one with some pop in both hands. Loche was a master defensive wizard. This fight would be a tough fight for Ken and I think it could go down to the wire as a close, close fight...if they fought 3 times I could see 1-1-1

 

The Paduano fight was Kenny at his best IMO, smooth and fluent with superb ring-generalship.

He definitely deserved another shot at Duran; I'm in the minority that thinks he may have done better second time around - Duran became more measured and less frenetic in the following years and although this version of him was an improvement, it just may have helped Buchanan out in the sense that he would have had more time to think and fight at his own pace, as well as having a clearer idea of what to expect without giving away the early rounds. That might be Irish logic though seen as how Duran simply got better and better; Ken would have always been hard pressed to beat him.

I also think that the resultant animosity on Buchanan's part took something from him after a while and hastened his decline whilst Duran's star was rising.

 

Right...I agree with you on both counts...I have always thought that Buchanan would have been more successful the second time around, and though I'm not saying that he'd BEAT Duran, but I'm sure he would have gone the distance and it would have been close. That, by the way, is what I believe that Duran and his management realized and wisely, but wrongfully sidestepped giving the Scot a much deserved rematch.
Also, I definitely think that the loss and the failure to secure a rematch took something out of Buchanan, who would go on to lose to an inferior opponent, Guts Suzuki, who wouldn't have come close to beating Buchanan a few years earlier. Buchanan could have gone on to beating DeJesus, Camacho, and so many others, IMO, but got let down I believe by circumstances.

 

Bump

 

I still figure it the same way..I believe that Buchanan wouldn't be lobbing haymakers at the brilliant Locche. Instead he'd be selectively scoring when and where he could and using his greater mobility vs Locche. I think Kenny would fight an intelligent strategy in this one, even if it mean't a very boring fight.