Page 1 of 1
Would Ken Buchanan of won if Duran didn't foul him so much?
Posted: 23 Nov 2005, 09:03
by Max Molyneux
Without the fouling would anyone reckon he'd still have beaten Kenny?
Duran said that was his toughest fight and even refused him a rematch.
Posted: 23 Nov 2005, 09:38
by elmersalsa
Duran was way ahead in the scorecards. Buchanan to win had to knock Roberto out. Although, he was coming back, he already got an ass whipping before the 13th round. 
Posted: 23 Nov 2005, 09:43
by Broncano
Nay
Posted: 23 Nov 2005, 09:43
by Steve M
No.
I think it's pretty obvious if you watch the fight that Duran was just better.No shame in that.
Posted: 23 Nov 2005, 10:59
by Max Molyneux
Posted: 23 Nov 2005, 11:14
by Tantum
Max Molyneux wrote:If he was so ahead why does Duran say that was his toughest fight and why did he never grant him a rematch?
Is that from the British Homers Journal?
Posted: 23 Nov 2005, 11:19
by KOJOE90
Kenny was a class fighter but Duran was a great Lightweight and I believe he wouls have still stopped or outpointed The Tartan Warrior without the fouls.
Posted: 23 Nov 2005, 12:16
by Max Molyneux
Tantum wrote:Max Molyneux wrote:If he was so ahead why does Duran say that was his toughest fight and why did he never grant him a rematch?
Is that from the British Homers Journal?
Duran said it himself.