If Ken Buchanan was about now......

If Ken Buchanan was about now.....

Then Ken and Paul O'Grady would rule the world just like the Klitchko's.

 

He would school near everybody around about his weight of this era. He even has the style to run Mayweather close at lightweight. He fought in a great era, beat all time greats and was just unlucky to be around at the same time as Roberto Duran. At lightweight he had the style to give Pac and Marquez hell. His movement and jab would see him beat both at LW imo.

He was a beautiful boxer. Technically he could well be the best we've produced. Great movement, great varied jab, high level ring IQ, ridiculously teak tough with an amazing fighting spirit. The only thing he lacked was a KO punch.

Ken was one of very few boxers from our shores that the yanks loved. You cant fail to love the way he fights. Often been wrote of as 'the excellent Ken Buchanan' or 'the brilliant scot'

 

He is about now!-just doesnt box anymore

 

Thing is if he was about now he wouldn't have a great like Laguna to beat. He'd school Abril and everyone would say 'looks good but average opposition'

 

Ken Buchanan was the best boxer the uk has ever produced, Duran refused to give him a return , and has recently said his fight with the brilliant scot was his hardest fight, he had to foul him to win.

 

Jimmy Wilde. Jim Driscoll. Freddie Welsh. Ever heard of them?

 

Joe Calzaghe is the best we've ever had bar none

 

No that old rubbish!

Joe is VERY overrated. IMO, He lacked bottle when it really mattered.

 

Buchanan's not the greatest Brit but he's better than Calzaghe. Calzaghe isn't even the greatest Welsh boxer. There's 3 or 4 better. In no real order this is what we have Greater than Calzaghe imo. I'll include Fitzsimmons and L Lewis.

Ted Kid Lewis
Bob Fitzsimmons
Jack Kid Berg
Jimmy Wilde
Jim Driscoll
Lennox Lewis
Freddy Welsh
Benny Lynch
Ken Buchanan
Owen Moran

Calzaghe is in the mix with Conteh, Macavoy, Winston, etc. Maybe im being harsh.

 

Ken defo isn't the greatest Brit, there's better records, but you can make a case for him being the best boxer. In terms of technical boxing skill he's very hard to beat. He was a very high level boxer that could fight. He just lacked a KO punch. It took a very special fighter to beat him in his prime.

Duran has said that about Buchanan on more than one occasion. Most recently in an IFilm London interview with that big annoying twat Kugan Cassius.

 

Surely a wind-up coming from someone with as much boxing knowledge as yourself?

Would like to hear your rationale behind this one Billy.

 

Who knows when you compare older generation to present. I do believe modern fighters are judged much harder and even one loss can be the end of a fighter being considered great now a days. One thing to think about in any sport where different generations can be judged the present wins.

 

I've heard this before but it's never convinced me, fighters often throw a bone when asked about certain fighters, depending on what country they're in- or the subject matter. It doesn't look Duran's toughest fight when compared to De Jesus I (and probably II) and Leonard I. That's without mentioning any fights after Montreal that Roberto lost (Hearns etc). He's easily ahead until the stoppage and there was only ever one winner that night....which clearly wasn't Buchanan. He hardly had to foul him to win- he was well ahead.


In terms of the return; yes it's a shame the Duran camp reneged on their words and didn't rematch Ken at the garden in 73- or 74 (there was a scant offer fighting again for peanuts in Panama). He deserved another shot for sure.

 

:rofl Yeah, sure Billy. Stick to training fighters, which you're great at, and leave the historical analysis to others mate.

Joe isn't even close.