Ken Buchanan V Julio Cesar Chavez?

So, the Duran that went the full 15 with Edwin Viruet (losing a good 5 rounds), 13 with Vilomar Fernandez, and went the full 10 round distance in non title bouts against Adolfo Viruet and Javier Muniz? That version was better against boxer/movers?

He also went the 10 round distance with Saoul Mamby and took 14 rounds to stop Lou Bizzarro just before his 25th birthday. I didn’t include them in the first paragraph in case you got technical on me.

Anyways, I disagree. That Duran might’ve beaten the younger Duran but his more measured and methodical approach would’ve made him far less of a headache for the pure boxer types.

 

Chavez cuts the ring too well. Ken had good footwork but Julio would more than match him. Chavez was old school. He breaks you down body and then head. Buchanan doesn't have the punch to gain JCCs respect.

Late stoppage for Chavez.

JCC=GOAT

 

Viruet only survived. He fought to survive. Running much of the fight. With that said Duran found him often. Edwin took some punches that would have dropped most lightweight. At the end of the day Viruet got his ass kicked.

Duran had no problem cutting the ring against "movers". Of course there is a fine line between boxing and running. Lou Bizzaro ran for his life but Roberto caught him.

 

Fair enough, mate. I'm also going to stick to my original point. Duran wasn't as good at 21 as he was at 25, 26 (or even 24 if I'm going to get technical ). I think we agree on that.

Your point is that he was such an animalistic force at 21 that boxer types would have struggled to cope with the ferocity, if I've understood you correctly. In fact, I wonder if you feel that Ken could have maybe edged a more mature version of Duran. I get your reasoning if you do. That extra bit of time and space would have suited Ken's more British style.

Probably best then to take Duran out of the equation and just concentrate on the two fighters in the thread; Chavez and Buchanan. As I say, Chavez was once widely considered on a par with Salvador Sanchez and Ruben Olivares and was/is arguably Mexico's greatest ever fighter. That's a hell of an accolade. And when considering why he is held in such esteem, you have to consider that he was probably at his best at lightweight - where he meets Buchanan in this match up. How he performed at lightweight is a big part in why he is mentioned in the same breath as fighters who are routinely considered to be on a higher level than Kenny.

So that body of work is a major contributor to him being in the mix to be ranked Mexico's greatest ever. Then I ask myself, would what Ken Buchanan did at lightweight get him in the mix as Mexico's greatest ever? The answer is an emphatic no. So in deciding who wins this, I think you have to go with who is the better fighter. The criteria I list above lead me to the conclusion that that is Chavez and that leads me to the conclusion he wins this fight. For all that styles make fights, the winner in a fight tends to be the better fighter. In this instance, in my opinion, that's patently Chavez.

 

This is the gold star response, perfect....

 

This fight, Julio Caesar Chavez Sr vs Ken Buchanan would have reminded me very much of June 26 1972 in Madison Square Garden, when Roberto Duran dismantled Buchanan for 13 rounds, before he stopped Ken in round 13 to win the WBA World Lightweight Title. Remember in round 1, Duran decked Ken. Slowly Roberto kept pressure on Buchanan, those very wicked body blows meant to take away Ken's stamina, it did. Chavez would have employed the same tactic, piece by piece. Ken would not be able to hold off Julio. Chavez by TKO 13 also, but no shot to the jewels in this one. Ken Buchanan was a great fighter but against heavy hitting body punchers, he cannot get it done.

 

I want to pick Buchanan, as he’s my all-time favorite lightweight and a great fighter in his own right, but I think he’d struggle to put a dent in Chavez, and while he had great movement, skills, speed etc; he wasn’t that difficult to hit. That makes me lean towards Chavez slowly working his way into the fight and ultimately being too strong and edging out a clear cut decision on the cards. Buchanan took a great punch so I don’t see him getting stopped here.

 

Great post, Double E

 

Thank you very much, Single C! Happy new year to you and yours.

 

Cheers my man. And to you and yours as well.

 

Ken Buchanan lasted as long as he did with Duran because

1. He was a tough ass fighter in great condition. Nobody gave Ken the title. He earned it in the ring. He was the lightweight champion of the world.

2. Duran as ferocious as he was, he was also raw and a bit inexperienced. He was rocking Buchanan with right hand leads but also falling in and smothering himself over and over. It prolonged the beating.

A more polished version of Duran would stay on balance and finish Ken similar to the way he wrecked DeJesus

 

Buchanan was favorite to beat Duran, I think his mindset would be different if he knew just how great Duran was. He never beats Duran but I think that offsets Duran’s experience somewhat.