Duran & Buchanan
-
nobleart1978
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 722
- Joined: 25 Jun 2015, 16:18
Duran & Buchanan
Should Duran have been disqualfied after he hit Buchanan low at the end of the 13th round?
-
handsofstone
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 23089
- Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 17:28
Re: Duran & Buchanan
Yes, you cant win a fight by KO on a foul, ref shat the bed, no doubt Duran was well in front but point still stands, especially seeing as Buchanan was defending champ, would've loved a rematch, you'd fancy Duran to probably do a better number on Buchanan but still think he deserved it
-
nobleart1978
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 722
- Joined: 25 Jun 2015, 16:18
Re: Duran & Buchanan
The ref made a total hash of it no doubt about it. Duran should have be disqualified.
Duran would have won the return, but that is not the point.
Duran would have won the return, but that is not the point.
-
Tuan_Jim
- Heavyweight

Re: Duran & Buchanan
It didn't look like that hard of a punch and Buchanan initiated it by hitting after the bell. In the heat of the moment it must have looked to the ref like a losing fighter overplaying his injury to win on a foul.
Re: Duran & Buchanan
Why he should have been necessarily DQed? First a ref gotta point out, if a low blow is intentional. There should be a DQ, if it is. If it's not, there should be NC. Or maybe TD. It didn't look intentional in that fight.
-
nobleart1978
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 722
- Joined: 25 Jun 2015, 16:18
Re: Duran & Buchanan
Yep. No Contest result wudda been about right I reckon....
Re: Duran & Buchanan
No. Buchanan was getting his ass kicked, he hit after the bell, Duran retaliated (and the punch wasnt that hard) and Buchanan tried to milk the DQ. If Duran had been DQd it would have been a terrible injustice.
-
pound per pound
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1605
- Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 14:36
Re: Duran & Buchanan
A very hard call. Since Duran was in the lead and the foul look like an accident, I say no DQ. However for sure there should have been a re-match,
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 15708
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
Re: Duran & Buchanan
Gerry Cooney hit twice the great Larry Holmes in the groin in that fight. Nobody cried foul then.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15185
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Duran & Buchanan
Wrong. Simply wrong.
Holmes was given time to recover. He could have taken up to 5 minutes. He took about 1 minute and 20 seconds to recover from the first low blow. He could have taken up to 5 minutes. Cooney was penalized two points for the first low blow and one for the second.
Holmes was given time to recover. He could have taken up to 5 minutes. He took about 1 minute and 20 seconds to recover from the first low blow. He could have taken up to 5 minutes. Cooney was penalized two points for the first low blow and one for the second.
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 15708
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
Re: Duran & Buchanan
Well, nobody cried for him to be disqualified for the low blows.Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑04 Feb 2021, 21:42 Wrong. Simply wrong.
Holmes was given time to recover. He could have taken up to 5 minutes. He took about 1 minute and 20 seconds to recover from the first low blow. He could have taken up to 5 minutes. Cooney was penalized two points for the first low blow and one for the second.
Neither the great Pernell Whitaker had a disqualification when he hit the great Julio Cesar Chavez' balls. Nobody cried foul about that. Then, why should they ask about Duran being DQ'd against Buchanan?
-
Tuan_Jim
- Heavyweight

Re: Duran & Buchanan
Does anyone think Kenny got hit harder in the balls than Gerald McClellan by Julian Jackson?
Imagine being hit in the balls by Julian Jackson.
He took his break, got up and knocked the Hawk out. Often it seems to be losing fighters who cry foul.
Imagine being hit in the balls by Julian Jackson.
He took his break, got up and knocked the Hawk out. Often it seems to be losing fighters who cry foul.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15185
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Duran & Buchanan
Hard to say. Sure it would hurt quite a bit in either case.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15185
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Duran & Buchanan
It was a different situation. A lot of people would have been been irked if Cooney was not called for the foul (like Duran was not) and Holmes had to continue right away.elmersalsa wrote: ↑05 Feb 2021, 13:44Well, nobody cried for him to be disqualified for the low blows.Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑04 Feb 2021, 21:42 Wrong. Simply wrong.
Holmes was given time to recover. He could have taken up to 5 minutes. He took about 1 minute and 20 seconds to recover from the first low blow. He could have taken up to 5 minutes. Cooney was penalized two points for the first low blow and one for the second.
Neither the great Pernell Whitaker had a disqualification when he hit the great Julio Cesar Chavez' balls. Nobody cried foul about that. Then, why should they ask about Duran being DQ'd against Buchanan?
Rules have changed over the years regarding fouls. In the 1920s and before, a fighter could have disqualified for one low blow. Then it became just a penalty, for one low blow. ( a round taken away in a fight judges by rounds. A point under the 10 point must.)
Later fighters who got hit low got up to 5 minutes to recuperate. (would be interesting to know if that rule was under effect for the Buchanan fight)
In the Duran-Buchanan fight, the referee did not call it a foul. Had he done so, he would have penalized Duran right away. Given that it was well after the bell as well, Duran certainly could have disqualified.