Two men with valid claims of being the number 1 in the world, neither of whom became legitimate world champions. I've seen such limited footage of Williams I find it hard to pick him here. Steele for me.
From 1935 to 1945 (would that describe his best years?) He beat every man he faced bar Michelle Palermo. So its not like he was inconsistent, he just had a lot of fights against top rated opposition and he was always able to secure victory at some point. Steele was the epitome of consistency. In theory this would be like a bull v matador fight I think with Holman being the matador. Intriguing matchup but as far as I know there's only like 10 seconds of Williams footage out there.
I think Williams was probably a bit better very best for very best but who knows? It's impossible to say given the limited footage of Steele and almost non-existent footage of Williams. Williams had his career inspite of a good deal more problems though, probably. Very bad hands, having to fight at a very high level, guys ducking, guys hunting him when he tipped over into past-prime. Steele had it cushty by comparison out in Washington.
Steele had it easier but to his credit he didnt duck dangerous black fighters As far as roles id agree with Steele the aggressor and Williams the boxer, Jones was slick and Steele had success with aggression and became the only guy to send him to the deck, Dundee had a good awkward defense and had Steele missing at times, but Steele feinted very well, punched short and got his demo job on him done Marshall did well being aggressive and keeping Holman on the defensive which is something I could see Steele having success with Id slightly lean towards Steele as a winner but, yeah its a hard pick
