Duran-Buchanan why wasn't Duran DQ'd?

There should be no doubts about the legality of the punch - it was definitely low and after the bell. That said, it was Buchanan who started it, Duran just retaliated - I think for a split second he was back in the days of beach brawling and the street fighter in him reared its ugly head and smashed Ken in one of his nuts.

But it wasn't the first unregistered foul of the night; Duran on at least two occasions had tried breaking Buchanan's back over the top rope and hit him after the bell previously.

Buchanan was too courageous a fighter to look for an easy way out. I believe he was genuinely hurt by the punch, protector or not, and reacted accordingly. But then, with the backing of his corner, he tried to get Duran disqualified to keep his title.

Although Duran was winning on the cards by a good margin (10-3?), Buchanan put up a good fight too. He's a lightweight legend in his own right of course, a more than solid champion who would have at least held his own with any of the greats. He pulled some slick moves on Duran which often get overlooked.

It's one of those great landmark fights like Robinson-LaMotta IV, Ali-Frazier and Hagler-Hearns; career defining, legacy stamping thrillers that are exciting, if not for the action, then because of the two great fighters squaring off and meeting for the first or last time.

 

It is sad and shouldnt be allowed no matter how hard up for cash he is.

 

Yep thanks for that, def a nasty shot from that angle, all i've ever seen as most have was the Duran back view.

Buchanan left the ring quite well off $$$ wise but though the usual bad (advise) & /unlucky investments lost it all, this bloke should have had plenty of TV work over the years but for some reason he's always just faded away 2 the edges, his bitterness towards Duran may have something 2 do with it, could never let it go:-(

 

Nah you're fine mate & totally fair & correct as i'am more than a bit obtuse sometimes from my "see it say it" stance which is missinterpreted as bias

Without doubt the ref let Duran get away with murder in there, if that was Mills Lane i recken Duran would have had points deducted but saying that Mills Lane would'nt have taken to much too Ken's way of protesting at Durans fouling, he'd only have jumped on Duran for ignoring his warnings & there would'nt have been many:smoke

 

Yeh, the through the ropes back breaking photo, Buchanan was not far off 90 degree's bent backwards & even Duran's head is through the ropes & his eyes are just fixed rigid into Buchanan's. it's my mousemat

You've got it all here, I'am more than convinced that Ken more than underestimated Duran & when you're such an accomplished champion as Buchanan was facing off against a 21 yr old street punk you'd proberbly be under the impression that you're going 2 hand out a clinic too the upstart.

Buchanan's old school, stiff, respectfull, dour scotsman compared 2 a street urchin who proberbly had never seen a knife & fork in his life, Ken got really pissed off during the whole build up too the fight & annoyed at the lack of respect he was getting shown from the Duran camp seeing he was champ & that some of the press who he knew were actually inking a possible Duran win so hence the

This content is protected

that Buchanan had for Duran & combined with ref's performence has haunted Ken till this day & if he'd seen the fight out his case for a re-match would have been all the more stronger but the Buchanan corner's reaction & the ref's interpetation of Buchanan's injury tainted any chance of a 2nd fight.

Obviously if there'd been an immediate re-match i'd have too say Buchanan would have won it as Duran was still a rough diamond as De Jesus exposed:smoke

 

Lobianco claimed he did not see a low blow and, though it was apparent to all that Ken was in a south of the border distress, Lobianco then said that Buchanan could not continue. Hearing this, and it is evident on the film, Ken said that he's OK and will go on. But Lobianco again said he could not continue and stopped the fight. The magazines of the day all said that Lobianco erred in his judgement. The correct result should have been a no-contest, but what can you do? It was obviously a low-blow but was Ken injured that bad? He also claimed that it wasn't just a low blow but a knee as well. Perhaps he thought that the way Duran ran into him. I do know he also urinated blood after the Ruben Navarro fight. Was it a rrecurring issue he had? Ken once told me that he would have knocked Roberto out within the next two rounds, that he was dead tired. I politely nodded, but that wasn't going to happen. Duran was not that tired and Ken never had the kind of punch that could turn around a fight or fighter like that. However, I will give Ken this, he was having his best round of the fight in the 13th and could claim it was turning around. Now, as for the subject of an immediate rematch. This style was all wrong for Buchanan. !0 times out of 10 I would go with the Duran of this era over Ken. Conversely, as Duran refined his skills, I feel that Ken would have had a much better shot at the Duran of the 3rd DeJesus fight, which I feel is Duran's prime. Ken just couldn't deal with that crazy animal that breathed down his neck that did not want to read the boxer's manual of 1972. Speaking of that crazy dude of '72, the other two top lightweights of that era, Esteban DeJesus and Rodolfo Gonzalez would have had a great chance against him (for the title) whereas Ken never would. DeJesus was an explosive counter-puncher and Gonzalez could have met Duran with more accurate firepower. And again, whereas I feel Ken would have done better with the '78 Duran, Roberto's refinement would have been too much for the other two by then (obviously evident with DeJesus). Styles are a funny thing.

Scartissue

 

Yeh, Great points of view there mate & as we all know YOUTH = FEARLESS:smoke

 

Well, it looks like MY EYES haven't deceived me, as I've come up with the same result as many other people have. The low blow was not borderline, it was legit, and no way Buchanan faked it.

Of course he would try to continue if the ref said that the fight would be stopped in Duran's favor, he didn't want to lose. He probably thought he was going to get a didqualification win, not a TKO loss.

 

Should have been an immediate rematch. Not least because Buchanan put up a very good fight.

 

Exactly, Buchanan was punching after the bell.

 

Buchanan did retaliate after the bell but Duran landed one square on the carrot and 2 onions. I can tell you they hurt, very bad even with a cup.

Buchanan ruptured a testicle in that fight im pretty sure it wasnt a body shot that did it.

 

Rodolfo Gonzales didn't have the chin of Buchanan..wasn't as tough, and would'nt have made it to round 7 against Duran..remember, he was flattened twice by Ishimatsu Suzuki..think of what Duran would have done to him. I've always believed that Buchanan would have gone the distance with Duran in a rematch..whether he would have won or not I'm not sure.

 

Yes, it was obviously foul, and Buchanan wasn't served by the ref's placement in not seeing what happened. Ken was too damned tough...and this was borne out by the fight itself...and always deserved a rematch IMO...

 

what term aint you heard?

Ken was a tough tough fighter not many if any stop him at LW.

 

Even if that were the case (and it's entirely ridiculous), the ref should have DQ'd Buchanan, not awarded Duran a gift title.