BoxRec

this fight was for the lightweight championship of the world. does anyone remember the 13th round.

duran hit Buchanan a low blow, and should have been disqualified. the more I see this fight the more

a agree with many sportswriters notably jack newfield, and others who strongly felt that duran should

have been disqualified. it makes no difference now 42 years later. however it was an injustice to the champion

Kenny Buchanan. what do you think?

Yeah ive always wondered why not much was made of the low blow,certainly not when people are reflecting on Duran's career,he still maintains it was a legal punch

Didnt he rupture Buchanan's ball(s)? I do know that Ken claims he was pissing blood for weeks and was in agony long after

No, Buchanan should have been given all the time he needed to walk it off just as the rules say.

Then Duran would have continued his disassembly of the standing champ, and no one would be harboring some illusion that Ken was going to somehow prevail.

It's not like there is doubt which way this fight ends.


I doubt even Ken would want to have won on that sort of a DQ.

buzz, the point is it was a low blow. surely if you see the fight there can be no doubt that it was a low blow.

it wasn't by any means intentional . but nonetheless, it was a championship fight. and whether or not Buchanan

could recover and win is highly unlikely. but, the fact is he was fouled. and duran according to the boxing rules.

should have been disqualified. it was a disservice to boxing to let that bout continue.

One of the most fearsome beatings of a genuinely good world champ that i have ever seen.

duran wad a terrifying whirlwind. You can pretty much see the consternation on buchanans face as he tries to go through his hard-won repertoire of tricks to keep the rampaging duran at bay. That he was still even standing at rd13 was pretty heroic and testament to his resilience, stamina and toughness. A good champ showing magnificent pride under the most extreme duress.

[quote="Counter-puncher"]One of the most fearsome beatings of a genuinely good world champ that i have ever seen.

duran wad a terrifying whirlwind. You can pretty much see the consternation on buchanans face as he tries to go through his hard-won repertoire of tricks to keep the rampaging duran at bay. That he was still even standing at rd13 was pretty heroic and testament to his resilience, stamina and toughness. A good champ showing magnificent pride under the most extreme duress.[/quote

all true, moreover can you agree that he was fouled in the 13th round, and the referee should have acted on the low blow.

Very few fights have ever been ended on a foul, much less an unintentional one.

Fouls are part of the sport.....and surely should not spell the end of every boxing event.


It occurs to me that if everytime a foul was committed fights would be stopped. We'd have quite a few less rounds in the books...lol.


Refresh my memory, did the ref take a point away from Duran? I think he did.

The ref can issue a warning, and, usually after a couple of warnings a point deduction, and usually after a couple of those, a DQ. Where do the rules state that someone must be DQed for one low blow?

BoxBuzz wrote:Very few fights have ever been ended on a foul, much less an unintentional one.

Fouls are part of the sport.....and surely should not spell the end of every boxing event.


It occurs to me that if everytime a foul was committed fights would be stopped. We'd have quite a few less rounds in the books...lol.


Refresh my memory, did the ref take a point away from Duran? I think he did.

LoBianco did not take a point away.

He claimed in the post fight interview that he stopped the fight as Buchanan was in no condition to continue.

Asked if it was a low blow that dropped Buchanan, he was vague and said something about it not being possible to be that hurt when wearing a foul proof protector.

In my opinion, Buchanan was hit low and should have been given 5 minutes to recover and decide if he wanted to continue. He was not going to win. He was well behind and tiring while Duran was getting stronger but Buchanan may have managed to last to the final bell as he was a very tough fellow and was throwing punches in the 13th.

Here's the relevant part of the fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTLyQMNzVcg

I have always thought that Buchanan continued punching after the bell, and Duran lashed back in retaliation.

Poor old Ken, for whatever reason he always seemed to have to fight on the road. I dont know why they never had a rematch clause put in the contracts.

I'm not sure the rule about giving a guy extra time to recover was in effect for that fight or not. I don't recall that rule being employed that far back. Maybe some else can remember a fight before that where the rule was enforced.

Of course, there are different rules depending where the fight was at and if it was a title fight who the sanctioning body is, and the states and the sanctioning bodies have made changes over the years.

You have to laugh when you hear the ref say that a guy can't get hurt by a low blow if he is wearing a protective cup. Talk about clueless.

Giancarlo, posted the fight, and, it's clear that duran had two warnings by lobianco to keep his punches up.

it was a horrible low blow, plain as day, and lobianco's comments after the fight were very strange. as alp posted

lobianco said " you can't be bothered by a low blow if you're wearing a cup" is an excuse for his poor job as referee,

as you watch the clip pay attention to the warnings duran gets about hitting low. I counted three times Buchanan was hit low

before the one ending the fight.

L.A. Kidd......hmm it's a foul for someone to hit after the bell. So....IF the ref would have been quick enough to end the fight there, before Duran returns the favor, perhaps that would have been good work on the ref's behalf? Quick, and done!

I'm just sayin.

Are we discussing Duran's fouls or fouls in general?

the discussion, is about duran fouling Buchanan in the 13th round, according to boxing rules when you hit a man low and put

him out of action because of the foul, then the ref can disqualify said fighter. now, duran was warned to keep his punches up.

he was warned twice, and he continued to hit low. the strength of my argument is the warnings duran got from the referee.

in my opinion and its probably mine only, the fight should have been awarded to Buchanan on a disqualification.

I do think Duran should have been penalized a point.

That fight wadn't goin nowhere but in the record books as win for Duran.

I know Buchanan felt that he was treated very badly by the ref throughout the fight and felt that if he had been given protection he would have won the fight.

It would be interesting to see how the fight would have gone if Buchanan had fought in the UK. I dont think Buchanan would have won wherever they fought, but it seems to me the argument of the pro Duran camp is

"he would have won anyway so what is the problem?"

In other words if you are far ahead on the score cards you can do what you like and it doesnt matter as you would win anyway.

Duran was clearly winning the fight but it should have been ruled a NC,i agree with a point deduction but if Buchanan couldnt continue then a NC is the only fair decision

If it happened today in a fight of simalar stature then this forum would be debating for months

Ive never seen the doctor look at a fighter bollocks but in some cases it could be the difference in the outcome of a fight,especialy if the fouled fighter ruptured a teste or burst an artery on something horrific and he chose to continue,who can save him from himself?

Doc arent just for head cuts,thankfully its a very rare occurence,boxings confusing enough without fighters getting cock and ballz out to prove their not faking

Giancarlo wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:Very few fights have ever been ended on a foul, much less an unintentional one.

Fouls are part of the sport.....and surely should not spell the end of every boxing event.


It occurs to me that if everytime a foul was committed fights would be stopped. We'd have quite a few less rounds in the books...lol.


Refresh my memory, did the ref take a point away from Duran? I think he did.

LoBianco did not take a point away.

He claimed in the post fight interview that he stopped the fight as Buchanan was in no condition to continue.

Asked if it was a low blow that dropped Buchanan, he was vague and said something about it not being possible to be that hurt when wearing a foul proof protector.

In my opinion, Buchanan was hit low and should have been given 5 minutes to recover and decide if he wanted to continue. He was not going to win. He was well behind and tiring while Duran was getting stronger but Buchanan may have managed to last to the final bell as he was a very tough fellow and was throwing punches in the 13th.

Here's the relevant part of the fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTLyQMNzVcg

The low blow dented the metal in the protector and it ripped through the padding, think it slashed one of his bollocks.

It was after the bell, very low and IMO deliberate. Buchanan wanted to go on and LoBianco stopped the fight, claiming it was a legal punch, at the very least Duran should have had a point taken off and if Buchanan was unable to continue, either a no contest or a disqualification.

that was he intention of this thread, to bring to light that it was indeed an injustice to ken Buchanan.

im glad most here agree. thank you.