Writing "Sorcery": an author's tale

I opened this book Wednesday evening and finished it yesterday. This book was very compelling and I didn't want to stop reading it. I highly recommend it. Being on the Leonard side of this "civil war" I read the book with a critical eye. I thought the author was pretty fair. There were a couple instances where I thought he featured Leonard's perceived advantages to support the theme of the book (I'll be the first to admit this is nitpicking a little).
At one point he suggested that Leonard took the less dangerous Benitez rather than fight Cuevas. At the time, Benitez was the more accomplished fighter and in hindsight, Benitez is thought of even more highly. Later in the book when recounting Leonard - Hearns, he suggested that this was Leonard's 4th superfight (including Benitez) and that it was only Hearns 1st superfight (discounting Cuevas). So which is it? Was fighting Benitez more significant or Cuevas? It's one or the other.
The 2nd issue, was his characterization of the referees and how it affected their scoring. Granted, Jo Jo Guerra's 10-2 scorecard was absurd, but I doubt that his having sparred with Sugar Ray ROBINSON in any way affected his scorecard (as was suggested). On the contrary, it's been my experience that most Sugar Ray Robinson fans resented Leonard adopting the nickname. I'll add that if Harry Gibbs had been the referee and had he scored the fight 8-4 for Hagler, that scorecard would have been equally as absurd and controversial as Guerra's. There's no way Hagler won 8 rounds of that fight.
The author details judge Dave Moretti's relationship with Billy Baxter, a potential business partner, and points out that Baxter told Moretti he'd placed a large bet on Leonard. The suggestion was made that this could have potentially "exerted a strong emotional pull on" Moretti. Moretti scored the fight 7-5 for Leonard (which is an extremely plausible scorecard for this fight). In fairness, the author noted that Moretti passed a lie detector test, but went on to plant the aforementioned seed.
One other thing I didn't realize or possibly forgot that Leonard pushed for a rematch and Hagler didn't want it.
Despite my critique above, this is a very good read.

 

Exactly when did Leonard push for a rematch, after Hagler retired or when Hagler asked immediately after the fight was over?

 

It was Tommy's first superfight but his first big name, even tho Cuevas doesn't get the respect he deserves (everyone thinks Palomino and Starling are both better fighters)

But it wasn't considered a superfight but more of mandatory (top) challenger meets champion; no different than Sandoval-Chandler or Sibson Hagler.

I think it depends on how popular the defending champion is

I'm still waiting for my copy to arrive

 

The Ring, September 1990.

As of this writing, rumours of a rematch, sheduled for November, are circluating freely. Some of the headlines: "Leonard-Hagler II (the national) and "HBO forsees Leonard-Hagler fight" (USA Today). And it hasn't just been in the newspapers. In late March, Boston's WHDH-TV reported that Hagler was seeking a rematch.

Sometimes tougher to corner in an interview than in the ring, Leonard wasn't elusive when asked about whether he was openly granting Hagler a rematch oppurtunity. " I would defintely welcome that" he said. "My clock is ticking just as fast as his clock".

 

I guess the underlying, unspoken point is that they were "big fights" because Leonard was in them. I don't think Tommy was overwhelmed by the stage. On the contrary, I think he thrived on it. Tommy's problem was an inability to hold when hurt, which he hadn't learned 4 years later (against Hagler).

I hold Benitez in much higher regard than Cuevas. There's always a "punchers chance", but I think the chances of Cuevas taking Leonard out were slim. The risky fight, from the perspective of losing it, was Benitez IMO.

 

Well, this did all take place before Hearns kind of exposed Cuevas. It's pretty audacious feeling sure about outboxing Benitez.
Regardless, I thoroughly enjoyed the book. I don't normally read books in 3 days, so that's a good indicator that I was engrossed.

 

Anyone else read this book recently?

 

definitly getting this book

i had hagler winning by 1 round but i could see how leanard won it

 

Mr. Marantz,

Your thread has convinced me to purchase the book. I will be looking forward to reading it. Best regards.