How good was Ken Buchanan?

He was a very, very good fighter. If Duran was not around he might have been a great one. He had a 61-8 lifetime record. He had wins over other lightweight champions like Watt and Laguna. His only stoppage loss was to Duran. He also had just one loss prior to Duran. I am not sure where I would rank him all time. I will have to think about that.

 

Buchanan was a superb long range boxer. Excellent jab, ring generalship, durability, and was as skilled at long range as any lightweight during the 70's. Its arguable that he was probably the best pure boxing lightweight of that era.

I had the pleasure of meeting him at a book signing in my town a few years back. Joe Louis was his idol, and I gave Buchanan a framed black and white charcol potrait of him.

 

The odd thing about Buchanan is the USA fans seemed more familar with him than the Brittish fans. Buchanan was a very good light weight. A technical boxer who happened to catch Duran at his best. Duran was well ahead on points, but he scored the Ko with a low blow, and never gave Buchanan a re-match.

There are tons of good lightweights. I think Buchanan is somewhere between 20-30

 

That's because he always fought on the road, never built up a hometown fanbase. Jim Watt didn't make that mistake, he had a bigger following than Buchanan ever did

 

I play the bagpipes and Buchanan was scottish, therefore I rate him very high, and for no other reason.

 

A fluid, tough as nails Scot who Duran, to this day, acknowledges as his toughest opponent ever. He staggered Duran before the huge punch to the cup stopped him. Duran was winning by a lot but technically could have and should have been disqualified for that infraction. I know Duran's fans, of which I include myself as, would vehemently disagree. Buchanan at least should have been granted a rematch for the dodgy finish.

 

The low blow complaint by Ken was legit?

I've heard Duran dismiss it as Ken simply getting the **** beaten out of him.

 

Duran was beating up Buchanan, but the fight ended with way too low blows.
Just watch the film, or still photoes taken from another angle.

Woller

 

Fine summary.

 

Ken Buchanan is one of my favorite all time boxers, and not just because I happen to have some Scottish ancestry. I remember watching him defeat Ismael Laguna, a great fighter by the way in Puerto Rico in 1970, and putting on that old-time, classic boxing exhibition against the undefeated Canadian Donato Paduano, who was on a tear at the time, and seemed to be on the way to a title himself. Buchanan didn't just have skill, he had an 'edge" to him that surfaced when faced with adversity, like in the Laguna rematch, and when he was under fire against Duran in '72. Unfortunately, most people are only aware of the Duran fight, and how Duran was all over him prior to the foul ending. Ken contested Duran and stood up to him and even continued boxing him far better than all of Duran's subseqent lightweight opponents, excepting DeJesus of course in that first fight when Esteban upset Duran. My esteem for Buchanan has been bolstered greatly by seeing some of his highlight fights on YouTube recently. Buchanan, along with Lennox Lewis, is the greatest of all British fighters, and certainly the greatest Scot who ever fought. Highly skilled, fearless and tough.

 

Great fighter just came up against one of the best ever at a very hungry time in his career in duran. The low blow was genuine and ruined a tremedous fight that duran was winning clearly. But no fighter deserves to lose the title that way it was wrong.

 

apart from the blow being low it was after the bell.

 

Excellent fighter, and the ending to the Duran fight was a farce - I was angry the first time I saw it on a re-run, the referee bottled it.

 

Try 11-16.