Ken Buchanan vs. Ismael Laguna I: My thoughts

[sweet_scientist]

I finally came across a copy of the first Buchanan-Laguna fight, a fight I had been trying to find for quite some time.

Despite the fact that it is a smudgy black and white and missing the first few seconds of each round with Spanish broadcasting overriding English commentary, it doesn't stop me from treating the fight like a prized new born child. (The fact that the Spanish commentary overrides Howard Cossell's commentary is only coincidental to my liking the fight, I assure you :D ).

Now, down to the fight itself: just wonderful stuff.

Much like the second fight it's one of those really enjoyable boxing matches with masterful skills from both men. Laguna is as slippery as an eel moving in out and with perfect fluidity, Ken is sticking out a hard jab and looking to force exchanges where his toughness can shine through.

Much like the second fight, the first fight follows a similar pattern: Laguna owns the early rounds, the middle rounds are shared and Buchanan comes home with a wet sail .... well almost.

Laguna is a little sharper in this one, flashing the form that saw him bamboozle Carlos Ortiz over 15 rounds in the first meeting of their trilogy. Buchanan is a little bit more raw, not as seasoned and doesn't handle the elements all that well. Of coruse, that's nothing too surprising, a Scotsman in Puerto Rico on a hot day is bound to feel the pinch.

Despite this adversity he presses the fight well down the stretch, ignoring the cut and swelling under his lead eye, and he takes 4 of the last 6 rounds to make the fight close.

Despite his late rally, I felt it wasn't quite enough and Laguna had done enough to win the fight. I should put my cards on the table, I am more a fan of Laguna's style of fighting than Buchanan's, and that probably swayed me a little in the scoring, enough so to have Laguna ahead. (I for instance only had Ken winning by a point in the second Laguna fight, even though most had it a tad wider than that).

My card read Laguna winning 144-141.


I had Buchanan winning rounds 1,6,10,12,13 and 14. I had Laguna winning rounds 2,3,4,5,7,8,9,11 and 15.


A few of the middle rounds were close, and could have gone Ken's way, and I am fine with a slender points win for Ken, but I think 1 or 2 points tops would be the go.


I'm not surprised that Ken got the nod in the end. The Puerto Rican crowd were actually behind him would you believe and cheering all his punches, even some of the missed ones!


Laguna had every right to be disappointed with the decision, he did fight his heart out, and I think he put on a gutsy effort in the very last round, potshotting whilst dog tired and catching Ken enough times to steal the round - something he was unable to do with the resolute Buchanan in the rematch.


Anyway, that's how I saw it. Hopefully the Brits on this forum don't view this post as being sacriligeous, demythologising one of the best wins away from home a fighter has ever had. Ken does have an argument for winning the fight, I just don't think he did enough. I don't begrudge him the win though, an excellent effort overall. :good

[Xplosive]

I wish I could get a copy of Laguna-Ortiz 1. I wanna see that fight badly.

[sweet_scientist]

I wish I could get a copy of Laguna-Ortiz 1. I wanna see that fight badly.

You can if you contact Raging(_)Bull.

[natonic]

Great stuff. I enjoyed your account. I favor Laguna just a tad over Ken too, but I recall having Ken winning the second fight by 2 or 3 points I believe, although he looked more the worse for wear.

[PhillyPhan69]

I finally came across a copy of the first Buchanan-Laguna fight, a fight I had been trying to find for quite some time.

Despite the fact that it is a smudgy black and white and missing the first few seconds of each round with Spanish broadcasting overriding English commentary, it doesn't stop me from treating the fight like a prized new born child. (The fact that the Spanish commentary overrides Howard Cossell's commentary is only coincidental to my liking the fight, I assure you :D ).

Now, down to the fight itself: just wonderful stuff.

Much like the second fight it's one of those really enjoyable boxing matches with masterful skills from both men. Laguna is as slippery as an eel moving in out and with perfect fluidity, Ken is sticking out a hard jab and looking to force exchanges where his toughness can shine through.

Much like the second fight, the first fight follows a similar pattern: Laguna owns the early rounds, the middle rounds are shared and Buchanan comes home with a wet sail .... well almost.

Laguna is a little sharper in this one, flashing the form that saw him bamboozle Carlos Ortiz over 15 rounds in the first meeting of their trilogy. Buchanan is a little bit more raw, not as seasoned and doesn't handle the elements all that well. Of coruse, that's nothing too surprising, a Scotsman in Puerto Rico on a hot day is bound to feel the pinch.

Despite this adversity he presses the fight well down the stretch, ignoring the cut and swelling under his lead eye, and he takes 4 of the last 6 rounds to make the fight close.

Despite his late rally, I felt it wasn't quite enough and Laguna had done enough to win the fight. I should put my cards on the table, I am more a fan of Laguna's style of fighting than Buchanan's, and that probably swayed me a little in the scoring, enough so to have Laguna ahead. (I for instance only had Ken winning by a point in the second Laguna fight, even though most had it a tad wider than that).

My card read Laguna winning 144-141.


I had Buchanan winning rounds 1,6,10,12,13 and 14. I had Laguna winning rounds 2,3,4,5,7,8,9,11 and 15.


A few of the middle rounds were close, and could have gone Ken's way, and I am fine with a slender points win for Ken, but I think 1 or 2 points tops would be the go.


I'm not surprised that Ken got the nod in the end. The Puerto Rican crowd were actually behind him would you believe and cheering all his punches, even some of the missed ones!


Laguna had every right to be disappointed with the decision, he did fight his heart out, and I think he put on a gutsy effort in the very last round, potshotting whilst dog tired and catching Ken enough times to steal the round - something he was unable to do with the resolute Buchanan in the rematch.


Anyway, that's how I saw it. Hopefully the Brits on this forum don't view this post as being sacriligeous, demythologising one of the best wins away from home a fighter has ever had. Ken does have an argument for winning the fight, I just don't think he did enough. I don't begrudge him the win though, an excellent effort overall. :good



I had Laguna winning the first fight as well. I think he has been vastly under rated and largely forgotten by many. I also like ken and credit to him he sealed the deal in the second encounter. 2 very good fights that don't get talked about much. I haven't scored it for a while but I may pull it out tonight???

[PhillyPhan69]

I wish I could get a copy of Laguna-Ortiz 1. I wanna see that fight badly.

Ive got I & II PM me if you are interested

[Robbi]

I'll need to get a hold of the first fight. The second one is an easier find.

[sweet_scientist]

I had Laguna winning the first fight as well. I think he has been vastly under rated and largely forgotten by many. I also like ken and credit to him he sealed the deal in the second encounter. 2 very good fights that don't get talked about much. I haven't scored it for a while but I may pull it out tonight???

Please do if you find the time :good

Laguna is indeed an underrated fighter. He's known more for his losses to the likes of Ortiz, Buchanan, Elorde and Saldivar, but I've only ever really seen him be convincingly beaten once, against Ortiz in their third fight. He also faced Locche and held his own, which should tell you something about this guy. Top shelf boxer, capable of consistently mixing it with the best.

[mstar]

i watched the fight in panama on holiday and i had laguna winning. good point i liked laguna a lot.

[Mantequilla]

I've got a copy of this with the cosell commentary not dubbed over.

It's an awful call by him.he spends most of the fight complaining about the lack ofa ggression or commitment and running down the fighters.


I still think despite the worth of this win, Buchanan was an inferior fighter to McGowan, Winstone and Conteh from this period as far as Brits go.admittedly it may be a bit of a petty comparison as they don't really have much in common other than the whole Britain thing.

[sweet_scientist]

i watched the fight in panama on holiday and i had laguna winning. good point i liked laguna a lot.

You mean er, Puerto Rico right?

[sweet_scientist]

I've got a copy of this with the cosell commentary not dubbed over.

It's an awful call by him.he spends most of the fight complaining about the lack ofa ggression or commitment and running down the fighters.


I still think despite the worth of this win, Buchanan was an inferior fighter to McGowan, Winstone and Conteh from this period as far as Brits go.admittedly it may be a bit of a petty comparison as they don't really have much in common other than the whole Britain thing.

Probably my all time worst commentator. I find him more annoying than even Lampley on a nuthug.

Mantequilla is yours a colour copy? I've seen some images from this fight that appear to be taken in colour from a hand held camera, just wondering if the whole fight was snapped in colour or not.

[Robbi]

Probably my all time worst commentator. I find him more annoying than even Lampley on a nuthug.

Al Bernstein and Don Dunphy are the best.

[Mantequilla]

It's black and white, pretty poor picture quality.Similar to the LAguna suzuki footage unfortunately.

Not sure about any other copies in existance.The only colour footage i've seen of it was from that youtube BUchanan highlight.

[sweet_scientist]

Al Bernstein and Don Dunphy are the best.

I agree with you. Prime Merchant was good stuff with the special comments too.

[Woller]

The more I see of Ken Buchanan, the more impressed I get. Winning the first fight against the great Ismael Laguna was very well done. I give a few of the middle rounds to Buchanan, so with his strong finish I give him victory by a small marging. Buchanan would not have gotten the decision in Panama, it was too close for comfort. I think that Laguna was a little bit over the hill, or maybe he had weight trouble in this fight. Laguna faded in the later rounds.
The first Laguna v Ortiz fight, showed Laguna at his very best. He was as fast as a greased lightning.
Woller

[Flea Man]

Still haven't seen the first fight, but have Buchanan winning the second by three rounds, not as wide as some have it (and I'm a proud half-Scot!)

The 1st win for Buchanan elevates him to one of the best British boxers of all time and rightly so.

[red cobra]

I saw the first fight live on ABC Wide World of Sports in 1970, and Buchanan was a clear winner. His corner men were so smart to put up a shade in the corner between rounds to keep Kenny as cool as a Scotsman could be in the tropical Puerto Rican heat, and that helped matters, along with, of course, Buchanan's gritty fighting spirit, which, even more than his skills, contributed to his points victory over Laguna. Guts and balls were the main keys to Buchanan's two victories over Laguna. The last three rounds of the first fight were Kenny's.

[red cobra]

Ken Buchanan, in my opinion, along with Lennox Lewis and Joe Calzaghe are the three greatest British champions, along with Bob Fitzsimmons and Ted Kid Lewis.

[Flea Man]

Post-war I rate Buchanan 2nd behind Lennox Lewis. As their is some dispute amongst British fight fans as to where The Lions alliegance lies (I myself NOT one of them) Buchanan would move up to 1st.

Fantastic fighter, shame some people only know him as losing to Duran. He would've lost on PTS but he deserved to be able to last the distance, no doubt he was tough enough to do that, even against Prime Duran.

[AlFrancis]

I've got a copy of this with the cosell commentary not dubbed over.

It's an awful call by him.he spends most of the fight complaining about the lack ofa ggression or commitment and running down the fighters.


I still think despite the worth of this win, Buchanan was an inferior fighter to McGowan, Winstone and Conteh from this period as far as Brits go.admittedly it may be a bit of a petty comparison as they don't really have much in common other than the whole Britain thing.


McGowan is not mentioned much on here, shame because he was a brilliant boxer. Have you seen much of him?

[Mantequilla]

The Chionoi fights and his win over Burruni.

Not many Flyweights would have outboxed him i don't think.Mabe not even Canto.just a pity he was such a terrible bleeder.

[AlFrancis]

The Chionoi fights and his win over Burruni.

Not many Flyweights would have outboxed him i don't think.Mabe not even Canto.just a pity he was such a terrible bleeder.

From what I've read he was winning both them fights comfortably.
I've seen the last round of the Burruni fight.
I've met Walter a few times.