How good was Ken Buchanan?

How do you see Buchanan v De Jesus going?

 

Similar to Buchanan-Laguna. A boxing match with some exciting moments, Buchanan surging late to take it.

 

I don't know if you have read Buchanan's book, but it's worth checking out. He describes the Duran with his heart rather than his head. Up until the low blow at the end of the 13th round he felt he was pretty much even with Duran. Not sure about. Buchanan won about 4-5 rounds IMO.

 

I had it 10-3 for Duran, he was definitely outfought there.

 

thats atrocious

he happened to get to the final of the lightweight tourney held in this forum, I'd position him around 6-10 marker

 

great fighter in my opinion. to win the title against a great champion like laguna in such heat takes some doing. boxer from europe are not used to the heat

duran should of been dq'd in that fight. if not for roberto e would be talking of him as one of the best ever. could of won the rematch. 50 50 fight. thats why duran would not agree

top 10 in my opinion

 

Buchanans fights in the Uk were mostly in private sporting clubs ,so the general boxing public weren,t exposed to him,consequently ,he didnt build a following and wasn,t as shrewdly promoted as Jim Watt,his corner man Eddie Thomas wasn,t flavour of the month with the big three Astaire/Duff/and Levene.The Scot was a fine fighter tough as well as artistic,he had the misfortune of having Duran as a contender,I only saw Ken fight once ,he was past his best and fighting for change,as he had lost his dough with a divorce,and a business venture going wrong ,In the early rounds Ken boxed well ,even dropping his opponent,Lance Williams ,I think it was ,but the youngster was too strong for him,and he lost the dec,sad ,after some of the performances he had put up.I would put him just outside the top 10,but he would give any Lightweight a tough evening,imo.

 

The St Andrews Sporting Club was where he fought Watt.

 

Buchanan would have beaten DeJesus. I have no doubt about it. It would have gone the distance, but Buchanan would have utilized that excellent left jab of his and would have outmaneouvered DeJesus as well to take a close decision, whether it was 12 or 15 rounds. Again, Ken Buchanan, in addition to his skill, was TOUGH with a contentious, edgy offense when in trouble. His fights against Laguna showed how he could gut it out, and basically FIGHT when necessary.

 

Win or lose, Buchanan would have gone the 15 round limit with Duran if they fought a rematch, and either way, it would have been closer. By the way, Buchanan was easily a top 10 lightweight, and would have been a handful for ANY of the lightweight champs of the past. I believe particularly that he would have beaten Chavez, and I know that that will rub JCC'S fans raw to say that.

 

Same here.

 

Chavez would've won if you ask me. Buchanan didn't shy away from a fight, even though he was a great out-boxer. I'd take Chavez to outdo him on the inside, which is where Chavez would dictate this fight at. Buchanan was tough as nails, and would've done well enough, but I don't see him winning a fight in close quarters with Chavez. He was never a fighter to fight off the backfoot entirely, and that(or else outdoing him in close) are the only ways to beat Chavez I'd say. I can't see Buchanan beating the Chavez that beat Rosario.

How do you guys see him winning? What tactics would he use?

 

Buchanan wouldn't show us any new tactics necessarily, just box the way he always did against aggressive fighters.

He wouldn't be in there with a dynamic fighter like Duran though; Chavez was far more generic. Definitely a great fighter, but one who was also fairly easy to read; if you had the physicalities to match or at least hang with Chavez, which Buchanan did, then you could beat him using your brain. Chavez wasn't an unintelligent fighter and he used a variety of tecniques but his plan of attack was quite straight forward - where Duran would feint and move loosely and slippery like a snake, Chavez would bore forward and throw the same combinations he learned on the pads back in the gym.

It's the same reason Muhammad Ali would beat Mike Tyson and Carlos Monzon would tame Dick Tiger.

 

Buchanan wasn't too flexible from the waist. His movement and pure outside skills were what made him a great lightweight. He'd need to move constantly with a come forward bull like Chavez. Dropping inside aint a bad idea, but only during brief moments.

Throughout the entire fight he'd need to work on creating distance, staying off the ropes, and keeping the fight centre ring. Stamina wasn't a problem, so thats a very positive aspect going for him in this match-up. And the chances of Buchanan knocking out a prime Chavez?, zero.

Buchanan had real difficulty coping with Duran's fury and non-stop volume. Chavez's style would give him better opportunities to score, build up rhythm, dictate the pace, and give him more room to breathe. It's just a question of can he keep it up tactically and negate Chavez's offense.

Buchanan's stamina, although not an issue, would be running a level below against Chavez than it was against Duran. Styles make fights.

 

I was a big fan of Buchanan, I seen him fight live n the Garden and Felt Forum, he was a good boxer,fast hands with nice power,form,good footwork and body movement. The fight with Duran (perhaps the greatest ever at 135) was a close fight until the low blow...Ken Buchanan would give any top 10 135 ATG a go and borders the top