New Leonard-Hagler Book

[SorceryatCaesars]

"Sorcery at Caesars: Sugar Ray's Marvelous Fight". By Steve Marantz.

I am the author and I thank this board for allowing me to introduce myself.

I covered boxing for the Boston Globe from 1979 to 1988 - including the careers of Leonard and Hagler.

"Sorcery" is about their rivalry, their controversial 1987 bout, and its lingering effect.

Twenty-one years later, fans still debate the decision, and Hagler still is angry.

Though I covered the bout, there was much about Leonard and Hagler that was hidden from view. It took 21 years to piece the story together.

Glad to be a new member of this site - I welcome comments and questions.

Steve

[Obstructed_View]

That was a great fight. I actually worried for Sugar Ray's life during the build-up to it, but he had a great team and they thought about every single thing they'd need, from how to condition him, negotiating the length of the fight and size of the ring, and impressing the judges in the last seconds of each round. He absolutely won the fight. I often wonder why Hagler seemed like he just sort of drifted through it, thinking that not backing up automatically made him the winner. He never did come out like the desperate-for-recognition guy that talked to the media, and he had the pace dictated to him for 12 rounds and flat got beat. I went back and watched that fight numerous times trying to give enough rounds to Hagler, and just couldn't do it. That one of the judges could have given the fight to him is a symptom of what's wrong with boxing, and why I ultimately lost my taste for the sport.

Hagler should be angry at himself. He had an opportunity and just didn't step up to it.

[dbreiden83080]

That was a great fight. I actually worried for Sugar Ray's life during the build-up to it, but he had a great team and they thought about every single thing they'd need, from how to condition him, negotiating the length of the fight and size of the ring, and impressing the judges in the last seconds of each round. He absolutely won the fight. I often wonder why Hagler seemed like he just sort of drifted through it, thinking that not backing up automatically made him the winner. He never did come out like the desperate-for-recognition guy that talked to the media, and he had the pace dictated to him for 12 rounds and flat got beat. I went back and watched that fight numerous times trying to give enough rounds to Hagler, and just couldn't do it. That one of the judges could have given the fight to him is a symptom of what's wrong with boxing, and why I ultimately lost my taste for the sport.

Hagler should be angry at himself. He had an opportunity and just didn't step up to it.

WOW it is interesting to me you see it that way because that remains highly controversial to this day and i am in the camp that feels Hagler won that fight. It was close don't get me wrong but he really dominated the tempo from RD 5 on i thought. He chased Ray most of the night and landed much harder shots. Ray was pitter pattering, way too much in the fight i felt. Once he tasted Marvins power, he was on his bike. Probably why he ducked him earlier in his career. Great fight but to me taking Marvin's crown after so many years was political. Ray was the Golden Boy, if the fight was close they were going to give it to him. I didn't see him beat Marvin, i thought he lost..

[SorceryatCaesars]

10 Weird Things About Leonard-Hagler

(as detailed in “Sorcery at Caesars”)

1. The boss of the Caesars Sports Book dreamed the night before the fight that Leonard would win a decision. He adjusted the odds to increase betting on Hagler, and helped Caesars win a bundle.
2. The Mexican judge, Jo Jo Guerra, had sparred in his youth with Sugar Ray Robinson – his “idol”. Guerra gave the new Sugar Ray a 10-2 margin of victory.
3. The Nevada judge, Dave Moretti, was developing a business partnership with Billy Baxter, a gambler who wagered at least $30,000 on Leonard. Moretti scored it 7-5 for Leonard, and was cleared by an investigation after the bout.
4. The California judge, Lou Filippo, was the referee in the “Rocky” film. He had Hagler winning 7-5.

5. Hagler gave in to the 12-round distance because Leonard argued that 15 rounds was advocated by the racist South African Boxing Association.
6. Hagler quit the promotional tour before it was finished because Leonard was too nice in their press conferences.
7. As a favor, Hagler appeared at the opening of Leonard’s restaurant in January 1986. They dined together, drank champagne, and Hagler confided that he was tired of boxing. Four months later Leonard blind-sided Hagler and challenged him.
8. They both fought for their first championship on the same card in November 1979. Leonard was the headliner and made $1 million. Hagler was in a preliminary and made $40,000.
9. Leonard’s cocaine problem and Hagler’s alleged cocaine problem were hidden from the public.
10. Referee Richard Steele did not penalize Leonard, despite repeated holding, because Hagler never complained to him.

[Obstructed_View]

WOW it is interesting to me you see it that way because that remains highly controversial to this day and i am in the camp that feels Hagler won that fight. It was close don't get me wrong but he really dominated the tempo from RD 5 on i thought. He chased Ray most of the night and landed much harder shots. Ray was pitter pattering, way too much in the fight i felt. Once he tasted Marvins power, he was on his bike. Probably why he ducked him earlier in his career. Great fight but to me taking Marvin's crown after so many years was political. Ray was the Golden Boy, if the fight was close they were going to give it to him. I didn't see him beat Marvin, i thought he lost..

Well, I must admit that I'm at a bit of a disadvantage, because I haven't researched any of this; I'm simply going off of my memory of the fight, but here goes...

The only controversy seems to come from people that never liked Leonard and can't accept that Hagler went out there and laid an egg in what was supposed to be his great redemption, which is why you always hear the argument that he somehow was owed the fight because he didn't back up or because he "landed the harder shots". Many of the items on the "weird things" list you posted smack of bitterness and whining rather than judging the fight on what happened inside the ropes. I personally don't care about politics, I didn't go into the fight with an agenda, and I don't care about what a fighter is or is not outside the ring. It's one of the reasons I don't follow boxing anymore.

The perception that Hagler landed harder shots is because there was a perception that he was a harder puncher by virtue of his size and strength advantage. Judges could therefore add some imagined value to punches that he landed, but it's exactly that: imagined. You don't count one guy's punches less because you think that he's not doing damage; that kind of idiotic judging would have cost Buster Douglas the heavyweight le, as he was not leading on a single scorecard at the point where he knocked Mike Tyson out. If you were going to immediately put Leonard at a scoring disadvantage because he's not the harder puncher, then you have to also give Leonard a scoring advantage for punching at the right times and for keeping Hagler from hurting him.

The old school at ude that you are "dicatating tempo" just because you are moving forward died a well-deserved death that night. Leonard tied up Hagler when they were in the middle of the ring, punched his way out and was able to land punches while moving backwards, which is the only way he was going to survive. Punching with a puncher is stupid, and Leonard knew better than to do it. If you don't think the bike was in his playbook six months before the fight you're out of your mind. Hagler had his chances and didn't close it out. If you hurt a guy and don't take advantage of it, or if you're satisfied to just move forward and expect the judges to give you the fight, then don't be surprised when you watch the guy take your belt away. Leonard did every single thing within his power to take the le; Hagler did relatively little to try to keep it.

If Hagler was done, he shouldn't have taken the fight. It would certainly explain why he stupidly agreed to 12 rounds instead of 15 for a little more money, and why he seemed to sleepwalk through the entire thing. I expected him to come out looking to kill Leonard and was surprised to find that the most animated he was during the entire evening was when he was dancing around at the end as though he thought he fought well.

I'm not sure why anyone can criticize Leonard for ducking Hagler when it seems like he picked exactly the right time to take advangage of him. It was strategically brilliant, whether you like him or not. Leonard's whole strategy for the entire fight was to win by decision; that if he was standing at the end, he was going to win. If Hagler didn't want that, he should have kept the outcome from the control of the judges.

To borrow a phrase from other sports, Hagler got outcoached.

[SorceryatCaesars]

Why Hagler Could Take a Punch:

(as detailed in ‘Sorcery at Caesars’)

Hagler’s lineage provided him magnificent boxing genes – that much was certain. He was graced with long arms and shoulders as wide as his ambition. More remarkable was his temporalis – a muscle that runs across the skull at both temples. Most temporalis are a quarter-inch thick, but both of Hagler’s were one inch, a phenomenon that astounded his physician when it was discovered during a routine exam in 1983. Hagler’s temporalis acted as a natural helmet and almost certainly helped him absorb blows. But he was sensitive to the notion of freakish physicality, perhaps from a racial perspective, and bridled at questions about his temporalis.

[Obstructed_View]

So is there any objectivity in your book or do you just complain about how Ray Leonard was a wife-beating pretty boy that needed his ass kicked? Maybe you should just watch the video of Terry Norris dismantling Ray a few times and get it out of your system.

[dbreiden83080]

The perception that Hagler landed harder shots is because there was a perception that he was a harder puncher by virtue of his size and strength advantage. Judges could therefore add some imagined value to punches that he landed, but it's exactly that: imagined. You don't count one guy's punches less because you think that he's not doing damage; that kind of idiotic judging would have cost Buster Douglas the heavyweight le, as he was not leading on a single scorecard at the point where he knocked Mike Tyson out. If you were going to immediately put Leonard at a scoring disadvantage because he's not the harder puncher, then you have to also give Leonard a scoring advantage for punching at the right times and for keeping Hagler from hurting him.

Well i guess we could go rd for rd on this one if you like but all i can say is i have seen the fight at least 50 times, i have it on tape and was a big Hagler fan and every time i see it, i score it the same way. 6-4 with 2 RD even for Hagler. I would have been fine with a draw, or a SD win for Marvin but not giving him a loss. This is a guy that was Middleweight Champ for so many years and was also on the receiving end of some terrible decisions as well, this was a close one that should have gone his way. But Ray had a history of getting the benefit of the doubt in the judging, to this day even he admits he lost the re-match with Hearns, got knocked down twice in that fight and he still was handed a draw.. What cost Marvin so much was the first 4 rds of the fight. He tried to out-box Ray and Marvin a southpaw, was fighting mostly right handed. That was a terrible mistake on his part, he got out of his gameplan and it cost him. I've always felt that is why Ray ducked a re-match with Hagler, because he knew Marvin would come out in his normal south-paw style bell to bell and look to take him out.. First 2 rds were all Ray, Counterpunching effectively, 3rd RD was extermely tight, Marvin got the first half of the RD Ray the 2nd, had it an even RD. 4th RD was Ray's again with Counter punching, Marvin now fighting consistantly south-paw, i had 3-0 Ray with 1 even through 4, but with about a min to go in the 5 that is where this whole fight changed. Marvin backed Ray into the ropes and landed a hard one two combo to the head, followed by a huge uppercut that rocked Ray badly. The RD ended with Ray on the ropes eating big body punches and he was hurt, you could see it..

From that point on, Ray was no longer attacking like he had in the early RDS or looking for hard counter shots. He had tasted Marvins power and obviously didn't like it. RDS 6-9 was Marving chasing Ray around the ring, landing hard body shots, backing him into the ropes, with Ray doing not much more than pitter pattering out of the corners, he was visibly gassed was Ray, in rds 7 and 8 especially, both big RDS for Hagler. The famous RD in that fight was the 9th where Marvin Backed Ray into the Corner and had him hurt only for Ray to fight his way out of the corner, and some had that RD for Ray. I can't see why as that RD was a typical RD for Ray in the 2nd half of that fight. Get into trouble, pitter patter dance around the ring and showboat to the crowd.. RD ended as did many in the 2nd half of that fight, with Ray on the ropes getting hit by Hagler.. RD 10 was pretty uneventful, Hagler landed some of the cleaner shots, Ray not much, both guys were pretty tired from RD 9. RD 11 Ray came back strong, danced and moved with effective counter shots. Actually stood in the pocket and took a few risks for the first time since maybe RD 4. And RD 12 was a typical RD for Ray again in the 2nd half of the fight, with Marvin backing him down, landing body shots and straight jabs, Ray would pitter patter and run. In the 12th especially, anyone who gives that to Ray needs a clue, as he spent about 30 seconds, dancing around the ring, with is hands up showboating to the crowd, hardly throwing punches. Fight ended yet again with Ray's back on the ropes eating punches..

So my final count was 6-4 with 2 even for Hagler, and a draw would have been fine but a loss, i never agreed with. Neither guy was in their prime anymore, Ray with the long layoff, Hagler with so many wars in the ring, now a step slow. Personally had they fought in 1982 or so when Hagler was in his prime, i think he would have KO'd ray, but that's just me.. And Ray denied Marvin the re-match i believe knowing he had been given a gift, and why tempt fate twice??

[ShoogarBear]

You're really Steve Marantz? I lived in Boston from 1977 to 1994, so I remember reading your stuff. (Along with Leigh Montville, Ron Borges, etc.)

I haven't seen Leonard-Hagler probably since the initial replays on HBO, but my recollection is that Hagler had a case. It was the first instance where I really was struck by a boxer "stealing" rounds by putting up a few quick flurries at the end.

Having said that, Hagler was definitely the local hero for years in the Boston Globe. No offense, but while you have a very good, interesting book, I would also assume there's a heavy Hagler bias until proven otherwise.

[SorceryatCaesars]

no hagler bias - i have no personal feelings about either fighter - other than gra ude for providing me a good story - i started at the globe in 77 and left in 92 - leigh montville, who wrote the foreword, was columnist from 73 to 89

here's something else in the book:

(as detailed in ‘Sorcery at Caesars’)


Lou D’Amico had a dream. The slight and bespectacled manager of Caesars Sports Book dreamt he was in the audience at the parking lot stadium. Leonard and Hagler awaited the judges’ decision.
“I can see Leonard in the ring and Hagler in the ring,” D’Amico recalled. “Then I can see Leonard with his hands up and the crowd going berserk.”
D’Amico, then 40, awakened from his dream on the morning of the fight. He scurried into the Sports Book offices, summoned his four supervisors, and related his dream.
“I want to have Leonard going for us in this fight,” D’Amico told them.
The supervisors were speechless.
“They looked at me like I had two heads,” D’Amico recalled.
Normally, a sports book puts up odds that generate equal betting on both sides, and collects a modest handling commission. D’Amico proposed shifting the odds to generate more bets on Hagler. If Hagler lost, the Sports Book would pay out less than half of its handle, but if he won it would pay out more than half. In essence, D’Amico wanted the Sports Book to bet on Leonard.
“How is Leonard going to win?” his supervisors asked.
“I don’t know,” D’Amico said. “I just think he will.”
That was how the Caesars Sports Book came to drop its odds on a Leonard victory, from 3-1 to 2 1/2-1.