To Regain Title and Respect, De La Hoya Needs Rematch

These are my final comments on Oscar De La Hoya and Felix Trinidad Jr., until maybe tomorrow.

Their fight might have been as big as the one in 1981 between Sugar Ray Leonard and Thomas Hearns, maybe even bigger if the pay-per-view numbers we’re hearing are correct, but I’ve seen nothing yet to convince me that either De La Hoya or Trinidad would have belonged in the ring with those two.

Angelo Dundee, who trained Leonard, said even before Saturday night’s fight at the Mandalay Bay Events Center that Hearns would have knocked out either De La Hoya or Trinidad in the first round. They would have lasted longer with his fighter, Dundee said, only because Leonard isn’t as congenial as Hearns.

“Sugar Ray would have teased them, taunted them and then taken them out,” Dundee said.

Of the three superior welterweights today--De La Hoya, Trinidad and Ike Quartey--De La Hoya has the best chance to be remembered among the best of all time, instead of merely his time.

But instead of going into each fight focused on proving himself as either an artful boxer or macho brawler, he should combine the two styles to become the consummate fighter.

He boxed beautifully for much of the first eight rounds against Trinidad. It was aesthetically pleasing but not the approach his trainer, Robert Alcazar, would have taken if De La Hoya hadn’t been so insistent. Although Trinidad is a powerful puncher with both hands, Alcazar believed De La Hoya would have prevailed if he had been more aggressive.

As it turned out, Alcazar still believes his fighter won. But Alcazar was as puzzled as everyone else when De La Hoya ran for the last three rounds.

True, Alcazar and his aide in the corner, Gil Clancy, told De La Hoya after the ninth that he had the fight won. But after De La Hoya backpedaled for the entire 10th, a suddenly-alarmed Alcazar told him, “I don’t want to see that in the last two rounds.”

Was De La Hoya not in condition for a 12-round fight?

Or did he, as he has done often before, ignore his trainer?

In either case, perhaps it’s time for Alcazar to go. I like him and think he has good instincts inside and outside the ring. I doubt it’s he, for instance, who encourages De La Hoya to involve himself in commercials, singing lessons and whatever else when he should be concentrating entirely on training. But if De La Hoya doesn’t listen to Alcazar, it’s time to find a trainer he will respect.

He respected Emmanuel Steward, who was fired after two fights because of differences with De La Hoya’s advisors. They felt threatened by Steward’s relationship with the fighter.

Now the fighter is angry at Steward because he predicted Trinidad’s victory, theorizing that De La Hoya had become more interested in business than boxing. But Steward was right, and if De La Hoya is honest with himself, I bet he knows it.

*

It’s baffling to hear De La Hoya’s promoter, Bob Arum, and Alcazar say De La Hoya doesn’t need a rematch with Trinidad.

I at least understand Arum’s motivation. He doesn’t want to deal with Don King again, especially now that Trinidad’s pompous promoter has more leverage at the bargaining table. Arum, of course, is correct when he says De La Hoya is still more of a draw than Trinidad. That, however, is no longer the issue.

Forget the money. That’s easy for me to say because it’s not mine. It also should be easy for De La Hoya because he has so much of it. He went over $100 million in purses for his career Saturday night.

If he cares about regaining his title and his respect, he has to command Arum to make the deal for a rematch any time, anywhere and for any amount of money.

Trinidad came to De La Hoya’s backyard for about half as much money as De La Hoya earned and went home with the belt. Now De La Hoya has to go to Trinidad in either Puerto Rico or New York to get it back. I’m surprised that Arum and Alcazar don’t see that. Maybe they’ve been off the streets too long.

*

Everything looks the same about the Minnesota Vikings’ offense this season except that Brian Billick isn’t calling the plays. . . .

How much difference did their former offensive coordinator make? If their first two outings are an indication, the answer is, “Eighteen points a game.” . . .

You think Billick isn’t an offensive genius? He’s making Stoney Case look like an NFL quarterback in Baltimore. . . .

Raul Mondesi is one of the few 30-30 guys (home runs, stolen bases) in history who won’t be able to look back at his season as a good one. . . .

He was hitting only .250--.254 with runners in scoring position--going into Monday night’s game. . . .

One Dodger, Eric Young at .302, was hitting above .300 with runners in scoring position. . . .

Who says we only print negative news?

*

While wondering if the screenwriter for “For Love of the Game” has seen the Dodgers or Angels, I was thinking: I like the Mets over the Braves and Sammy Sosa over Mark McGwire, Notre Dame might be easier for USC than Louisiana Tech, De La Hoya will win the rematch if there is one.

Randy Harvey can be reached at his e-mail address: randy.harvey@latimes.com.