An old Carlos Ortiz loses to Ken Buchanan

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by TheGreatA, Nov 30, 2009.


  1. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,470
    Sep 7, 2008
    In my defence, I meant to say underrated:good

    There's a difference between PREDICTIONS and ANALYSING a fight. You'er a terrible poster, everyone on here knows it. You have knowledge, but allow bias to get in the way of most of your posts.

    PLUS: Anorexic stalker :rofl WTF????
     
  2. GPater11093

    GPater11093 Barry Full Member

    38,034
    92
    Nov 10, 2008
    you gusy forget it was supposed to be Duran in their with Ortiz !!!!!

    Also Prime for Prime i have Ken winning a close close decision
     
  3. teeto

    teeto Obsessed with Boxing banned

    28,075
    54
    Oct 15, 2007
    As high as i rate Buchanan, I have to say that Ortiz did very well against skilled boxer types in his prime, i'd favour him. But if a style can take one from Ortiz on a given night (say in a series) then Buchanan might be primed for the job, as i say, stylistically. Ortiz was very good at offsetting the outboxer types, like Old Bones. He did that by jabbing, potshotting and maneuvring his man to his advantage, it was very clever. But for my liking Buchanan had a bit more to offer than Brwon in terms of inside flurrying and you never know if it gives an extra dimension to his chances. As it is, if Ortiz is at his best then his strength and bodywork of his own means he's immense in that area. It would be a fantastic fight prime for prime.
     
  4. Tin_Ribs

    Tin_Ribs Me Full Member

    4,442
    4,014
    Jun 28, 2009
    Ortiz looks like a Franciscan friar there. Sad fight to watch though, he was well past it.

    Prime for prime my natural bias towards Buchanan makes me think that he could have pipped Ortiz in a trilogy (though I like Ortiz too much to feel a great deal of conviction).
    Buchanan wasn't as fast or tricky as Laguna, but he was still smooth while being both more robust and a slightly better ring general.

    How good would it have been though?
     
  5. AlFrancis

    AlFrancis Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,812
    843
    Jul 25, 2008
    This fight is definitely one for the connoisseur. Much as I love Ken I see Ortiz taking it on points in a fight that is hard to score. There would be plenty of debate about the decision afterwards.
     
  6. turpinr

    turpinr Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,227
    1,255
    Feb 6, 2009
    :nonoi disagree and think ken would get the decision.
     
  7. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    53,341
    45,518
    Apr 27, 2005
    Until i look harder i just plain think Ortiz is the better man peak for peak.
     
  8. Bummy Davis

    Bummy Davis Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,674
    2,172
    Aug 26, 2004
    Ortiz would always be hard to look good against but Buchanan would also always be a tough opponent for Ortiz. I was always a big fan of Buchanans. I remember thinking he was one of the best fighters I had seen in the 70's. I asked Nat Fliecher what he thought of his and he said he is a very good fighter but did not classify him as great. Buchanan was up there and even in his losing effort vs the Great Roberto Duran at Lightweight, Buchanan showed he could hang with the best
     
  9. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    53,341
    45,518
    Apr 27, 2005
    Tho Buchanan hung tough in all seriousness how many rounds did you give him? He was MILES behind. Not even in it really. He hung with a juvenile Duran but was, in reality, getting flogged.

    I tip my hat, but the man was getting whupped.
     
  10. Tin_Ribs

    Tin_Ribs Me Full Member

    4,442
    4,014
    Jun 28, 2009
    Nah, he wasn't. He was losing without a doubt, but was in the fight. I've not seen it for a long time or ever actually scored it, but going into the 13th Buchanan had taken about 4 rounds IMO before Duran gave him that vasectomy. I need to watch it again though to be fair.
    He was hitting Duran cleanly but didn't really have the power to trouble him or keep him off.

    It might sound daft, but I've always thought that Kenny would have acquitted himself better in a rematch for two reasons. Firstly, it was partly because Duran was so raw, rough and furious that Buchanan struggled as he did with him. Duran would later become more polished and patient, but it's this that would have given Buchanan more time to think on his feet - it was the raw, unpolished fury that unsettled him rather than the completeness that would come later. Secondly, I don't think Buchanan would have been so slow to start 2nd time around upon knowing what to expect. I think he thought that Duran was going to get tired after starting so ferociously, and therefore paced himself accordingly. Obviously he misjudged the situation and gave early rounds away that he wasn't able to fully claw back. It might not have been the case a second time if Duran's management had been honourable enough to give Buchanan another crack at the whip, which they weren't.

    However, when all is said and done, Buchanan would have most likely had his work cut out against any version of Duran. Just a bad style for him.

    Ortiz undoubtedly had the greater career and beat the better fighters. But the very best that Kenny brought to the table would have been enough to push Ortiz to brink IMO.