New Leonard-Hagler book: "Sorcery at Caesars"

[Ezzard]

Hagler was a constant drip-drip-drip; Leonard was like someone turning the tap fully on and then off again. I think in the end the punch count was about even. But there's more to scoring than just punch count. Leonard's shots landed cleanly and in clusters. Hagler's seemed to have little snap in them but then as the fight went on he was finding the bigger punches, usually towards the end of rounds.

I see what both ray and Alp are saying. But in the end 3 judges at different angles should give you the right result and most of the time they do. I've always thought that split decisions warrant a rematch.

[Robinson]

I agree, I have always thought he won. I have seen the fight get
closer after ive rewatched it...but always have scored it for Leonard.

[raylawpc]

But in the end 3 judges at different angles should give you the right result and most of the time they do.

Ezzard, I agree 100%.

[witherspoon]

I scored it 115-115, 2 rounds even.

[ringsider]

I concede had the fight gone 15 rds like it should have, Hagler may haver been able to win it......but it was not 15.

[Seamus]

My favorite aspect of the fight, was that at the introductions, the crowd was pro-Hagler by about a 2-1 margin, but after the 4th round it's was about 2-1 Leonard.

Over 20 yrs later I still put this fight in the same context I did back then. Literally speaking, Hagler was supposed to brutally retire Sugar Ray Leonard that night. Instead he found out Ray had much faster hands, quicker feet, better head movement, and threw more accurate punches. Not to mention that perhaps the biggest shock for Hagler that evening was finding out that Leonard could take his best shots without crumbling.

[Elton John]

The once spectacular Hagler reduced to a pathetic spectacle by father time and a grueling schedule in which ray leonard happily gushed after the Mugabi fight "I can beat him! I can beat marvin Hagler!"

[Elton John]

By the way, I have read the book and believe every household should own a copy. I keep mine on proud display in my living room and must say it is quite an attention grabber to those who see it.

[Elton John]

Especially eye opening is page 130 as hagler confides to Leonard........

guess what comes next?

[ringsider]

Especially eye opening is page 130 as hagler confides to Leonard........

guess what comes next?

The blow job?

[turn2stone]

about halfway through the book right now. fun read. takes me back nicely. im just past leonard-hearns I. i always remember a terribly hard left hook to hearns ribs in round 6 changing the fight. for some reason this punch isn't referred to at all. i seem to remember manny steward also seeing this one punch as a turning point. still going from memory here, but the fight turned right at that immediate point like the flick of a switch. anyway, it's a very good read that gives you the big picture of leonard vs hagler and how their paths criss-crossed so many times before entering the ring to face each other.

[Counter-puncher]

about halfway through the book right now. fun read. takes me back nicely. im just past leonard-hearns I. i always remember a terribly hard left hook to hearns ribs in round 6 changing the fight. for some reason this punch isn't referred to at all. i seem to remember manny steward also seeing this one punch as a turning point. still going from memory here, but the fight turned right at that immediate point like the flick of a switch. anyway, it's a very good read that gives you the big picture of leonard vs hagler and how their paths criss-crossed so many times before entering the ring to face each other.

good call, although hearns was rocked upstairs maybe 30secs prior to the bodyshot. Hearns had been rocked badly by the left uppercut, took some hard combinations, then came firing insanely back and landed a couple of nifty jab/hooks, THEN with Hearns having stayed in range Ray landed that brutal left hook downstairs which seemed to nearly cut Tommy in two.

[turn2stone]

probably time for me to go back and watch the fight again.

[turn2stone]

ok. just finished reading the book. a quick and easy read. it has the feeling of being put together with newspaper and magazine stories and constant re-watching of the telecast.
also...not so sure i buy the theory that Leonard wanted 12rds instead of 15 because he knew 3 yrs of cocaine abuse had sapped his body of stamina; and that Hagler's cocaine use factored into his decision to agree to 12 rounds. Seems the evidence is based on high profile sports cocaine busts and deaths that occurred around the time of the fight. the author's thinking is that since the events occured, then they must have affected the fighters thinking and decision making. not so sure i can make that leap in logic. as well, the dissecting of the scoring near the end of the book is interesting. bottom line is it's okay think either guy won and i'd recommend the book.

[moorey717]

Excuse my ignorance but - Hagler was a cocaine user?!

Got my copy ordered, though having recently read 'Four Kings' by George Kimball, I'm not expecting to hear a lot of stuff that hasn't already been written about.

[turn2stone]

Excuse my ignorance but - Hagler was a cocaine user?!

Got my copy ordered, though having recently read 'Four Kings' by George Kimball, I'm not expecting to hear a lot of stuff that hasn't already been written about.

the Hagler-cocaine issue was new to me.

[Robinson]

I read this book over the weekend. Was a fun read. I felt it at times
tried to look into things a little too much.

It seems as though the book was well researched and had some
interesting things in it.

I scored the fight for Leonard. Though I can see how many felt that
Hagler should of won...being the reigning champ...and the damage of
his body blows and his effort in some of the later rounds.

I however still scored it for Leonard...not a bad win for a welterweight
who had not been in the ring for quite some time.

Im just about to start reading 'Four Kings' by George Kimball which will
no doubt have some over lap on this book.

[turn2stone]

I read this book over the weekend. Was a fun read. I felt it at times
tried to look into things a little too much.

It seems as though the book was well researched and had some
interesting things in it.

I scored the fight for Leonard. Though I can see how many felt that
Hagler should of won...being the reigning champ...and the damage of
his body blows and his effort in some of the later rounds.

I however still scored it for Leonard...not a bad win for a welterweight
who had not been in the ring for quite some time.

Im just about to start reading 'Four Kings' by George Kimball which will
no doubt have some over lap on this book.

i have my eye on that book as well. not sure why they didn't throw benitez into the mix as he's got the same amount of fights as hagler against the other 3. plus his story of early glory to humbling retirement is the stuff writers should relish. guess his fights were too clinical.
*********
update
had to go check a video i remembered from my collection. back in 1991 Top Rank put out The Fabulous Four: Boxing's Greatest 4-Way Rivalry (Leonard,Hagler,Duran and Hearns). So i guess there is precedent for leaving Benitez out.

look forward to your review.

[Robinson]

I jhave that DVD..its pretty good. I would imagine it would go well
with that book, of a similar name.

I would love to be able to get my hands on those Top Rank doco's
they were always enjoyable.

I agree regarding Benitez he would make for a good chapter.

[Collins2000]

Wilfred's one punch KO of my old favourite Maurice Hope is chilling.

Mo was in good form going into that fight but he was no match for Benitez.

Incidently, has anyone ever seen Hope's 15th round TKO over Antuerfermo? I'd like to see that.

[Robinson]

Being a champ at such a young age like he was is just an incredible
feat.

I would like to see more on Benitez. I have only seen his fight with
Leonard and Hearns.

[Counter-puncher]

Wilfred's one punch KO of my old favourite Maurice Hope is chilling.

Mo was in good form going into that fight but he was no match for Benitez.

Incidently, has anyone ever seen Hope's 15th round TKO over Antuerfermo? I'd like to see that.

no, and i have never seen anyone explain how the man who later went 15 with Hagler, could get stopped by Hope....

[Collins2000]

Wilfred's one punch KO of my old favourite Maurice Hope is chilling.

Mo was in good form going into that fight but he was no match for Benitez.

Incidently, has anyone ever seen Hope's 15th round TKO over Antuerfermo? I'd like to see that.

no, and i have never seen anyone explain how the man who later went 15 with Hagler, could get stopped by Hope....

It's possible that Vito was struggling to make 154. And Hope was a pretty good light-middleweight in his own right.

I'd like to see that fight if it still exists.

If only Terap was here to give us some insight...

[bennie]

Wilfred's one punch KO of my old favourite Maurice Hope is chilling.

Mo was in good form going into that fight but he was no match for Benitez.

Incidently, has anyone ever seen Hope's 15th round TKO over Antuerfermo? I'd like to see that.

no, and i have never seen anyone explain how the man who later went 15 with Hagler, could get stopped by Hope....

It's possible that Vito was struggling to make 154. And Hope was a pretty good light-middleweight in his own right.

I'd like to see that fight if it still exists.

If only Terap was here to give us some insight...

Hope was a strong fighter. People think Benitez when they think Hope, and that is a shame.

[Counter-puncher]

Wilfred's one punch KO of my old favourite Maurice Hope is chilling.

Mo was in good form going into that fight but he was no match for Benitez.

Incidently, has anyone ever seen Hope's 15th round TKO over Antuerfermo? I'd like to see that.

no, and i have never seen anyone explain how the man who later went 15 with Hagler, could get stopped by Hope....

It's possible that Vito was struggling to make 154. And Hope was a pretty good light-middleweight in his own right.

that would be my only stab at an explanation. and yes, bennie, shame that Hope is defined by benitez in the same way that Minter is largely defined by Hagler