Poll: Did Duran Win The Lightweight Title Fairly?

[mickey malone]

Many thanks for the quality posts that have been submitted thus far..
It's a lot clearer in my mind, exactly what happened now..
Back then, I suppose it was deemed the right thing to do, but I'd have no doubt, Buchanan would have been given 5 minutes recovery time, had the fight been contested under modern day rules..

[JAB5239]

Originally Posted by Bob Anomaly

But a title shouldnt change hands as a result of a low blow. The decision could have been reversed or at least called a no contest after they saw the replay on video.
Ken deserved the rematch because he was champion and if u are hit low u shouldnt have to stand up before a count of ten.

The ref made a mistake, but even if Duran was ahead, Ken deserved to lose his title fairly.

I would have liked to see Buchanan get a rematch, But Duran was pulling away at that point. Can't blame Duran for the refs indiscretion. That said, I think Duran would have won regardless. Jmo.

[Bob Anomaly]

Originally Posted by blacklodge

The referee lost control of the fight, no doubt. There were a lot of punches thrown well after the bell. One of them was low. It was my understanding that the referee (LoBianco?) waived the fight because Buchanan was unable to continue. I think, despite the foul (which officially wasn't a foul), it would be more unfair to Duran that he not get the title he earned over 13 rounds of fighting than to reward Buchanan for being unable to continue after a low blow that wasn't a low blow. In that sense, when I say Buchanan didn't deserve a rematch, I mean that the WBA (?) shouldn't be obliged to mandate a rematch because the referee didn't see a low blow. That's a bad, bad precident to establish if a governing body can sift through a fight replay and punish a winning fighter after the fact based on the referee's competance. If Ken deserved to lose his title fairly, then he should have gotten up and finished the fight.

He obviously needed time to recover.

I dont know if there was a 5 minute rule back then, but if he couldnt physically stand up because of a low blow, it was obviously unfair.

To lose a title u have worked so many years to win and then defend, on a ref's blunder is ridiculous.
Rematches are made all the time. Even Tyson who was destroyed by Holyfield in their first fight got a rematch. I know its all about money, but Holyfield won almost every round, and TKO'd Tyson.
Ken was hit low!

I think its just as bad a precedent to have a title change hands because of a foul shot. Fighters will try and get away with it all the time. It would be the right thing to do to give Ken a rematch when the saw he was hit low. This was a very rare situation. And it ended the fight. The WBA wouldnt be looking at every fight or every decision made by the ref and granting rematches or over turning decisions. This was a very controversial ending.

Duran didnt win all 13 rounds. Ken fought hard and took much punishment, so its just as unfair that he gets stopped for an illegal blow. And even more so IMO because he was the champion.

It amounts to robbery. IMO.

[1SILVA]

Originally Posted by mickey malone

Although I haven't watched the fight in ages, I've always felt that Ken Buchanan may have been harshly treated..
I remember the fight being stopped at the end of the 13th, after Ken had been floored with a blatant low blow, only a slpit second before the bell sounded..
Then, I can only recall the ref, hastilly waving the fight off as Buchanan writhed in agony, while simultaneously attempting to protest..

Have I got this wrong?.. Or did Buchanan tell the ref, he couldn't continue?

I've seen a documentury, in which Duran openly admits to hitting him low, and then laughs it off while saying that he had to out tough Buchanan in order to make him quit..

Should Duran have been disqualified?
Should Buchanan have been given time to recover?
Or was Kenny completely beaten and deserved to lose his title?

Shortly after losing the title, Buchanan was still good enough to beat Jim Watt, so why wasn't he given a rematch with Duran?

I look forward to your thoughts and opinions.. mm

The ref didn't see the low blow. Had he seen the low blow, he would have given Buchanan time to recuperate. That said, Buchanan won only three rounds and was way behind on all three scorecards. duran dominated the fight and a rematch would not have mattered. duran would have ko'd him in the rematch. Buchanan could not keep Duran off of him, and trying to win on a dq doesn't work. Protect yourself at all times

[mickey malone]

Originally Posted by 1SILVA

The ref didn't see the low blow. Had he seen the low blow, he would have given Buchanan time to recuperate. That said, Buchanan won only three rounds and was way behind on all three scorecards. duran dominated the fight and a rematch would not have mattered. duran would have ko'd him in the rematch. Buchanan could not keep Duran off of him, and trying to win on a dq doesn't work. Protect yourself at all times

Buchanan would have needed a KO to win, and I think it's safe to say, that he wasn't gonna get one, whether he'd have had 5 minutes or not..
Even so, the referee obviously wasn't on the ball, and ended the fight too quickly..

[Obama]

Originally Posted by TheGreatA

I pretty much count that as a win for Sharkey and the rematch as a win for Schmeling. May sound silly but that's how I see it.

I see it the same way.

[blacklodge]

I read today that Buchanan is talking comeback and wants to fight Duran again. I shite you not.

[1SILVA]

Originally Posted by mickey malone

buchanan would have needed a ko to win, and i think it's safe to say, that he wasn't gonna get one, whether he'd have had 5 minutes or not..
Even so, the referee obviously wasn't on the ball, and ended the fight too quickly..

you are 100 percent correct. If they fought ten times, duran wins 9 times

[Bob Anomaly]

Originally Posted by 1SILVA

The ref didn't see the low blow. Had he seen the low blow, he would have given Buchanan time to recuperate. That said, Buchanan won only three rounds and was way behind on all three scorecards. duran dominated the fight and a rematch would not have mattered. duran would have ko'd him in the rematch. Buchanan could not keep Duran off of him, and trying to win on a dq doesn't work. Protect yourself at all times

Protect ur groin at all times??

I dont think Ken was trying to win by DQ. Duran was a very hard puncher. I dont think Ken was play acting.

[1SILVA]

Originally Posted by bob anomaly

protect ur groin at all times??

I dont think ken was trying to win by dq. Duran was a very hard puncher. I dont think ken was play acting.

i agree. Ken wasn't acting. Since the \ref didn't see it, ken had to get up. He didn't, so duran won. The only way buchanan would have won that fight was by dq. He was kicking his ass the entire fight