Lets say Leonard fights Hill instead of Lalonde. Hill wasn't a particularly big puncher but he was technically superior to Lalonde, how do you see this one playing out. Thoughts?
Hill would have won a decision, especially bearing in mind it wouldn't be a catchweight. I don't think Ray would have got past/around Hills jab often enough, and he ain't ko'ing Hill. Hearns had the reach, speed, deterrent power and ATG jab to nullify Hill. Far different proposition for Leonard especially so high up in the weights.
Agreed, Hill had mobility at that stage that Leonard was starting to lose, along with a level of stamina and skills that were superior to Lalonde's. A decision win for Virgil is a reasonable outcome.
Virgil Hill would win a decision easily. This is the difference between Ray and Thomas. Thomas had a 78 inch reach to Hill's 77 inch reach and it was quick. Had Tommy not had the better jab in 1991 he would not have beaten Hill. It set everything up, and all Tommy then had to worry about was Hill's counter left, and that was easy for someone of Tommy's experience. Ray could not do that and Hill would outjab him in ring center or outbox him in the ring.
Hill or Williams would have beat Leonard in 1988. Especially at the honest light-heavy limit. Lalonde was the weakest titlist in the division.
Ray obviously did not pick Virgil Hill for a reason. He could have fought Virgil had he wanted to. Virgil was champion then also in the WBA. The WBC light heavyweight title which Lalonde had, was the same title Hearns in March of 1987 against Dennis Andries a year and a half before the Leonard/Lalonde fight . Hearns relinquished the title and fought Roldan for the WBC middleweight title in October of the same year. I forget the circumstances how Lalonde got the title. If I remember correctly it was maybe a fight between Lalonde and Eddie Davis. I could be wrong, but Eddie Davis comes to mind. As for Hearns moving down and fighting at middleweight after winning that title. He did move up and fight the fights at the legit weights. No games. That is why I was nervous that if Tommy went past a few rounds with Roldan he might be weakened. Anyway, Lalonde won the title and Ray got him to fight at 168 for two titles. One of the only times I really felt Ray was using his popularity in an unfair way. He did not deserve 2 titles that night and even one. He never fought at 168 before, but even then he should have fought the champion or a contender at that weight to get that vacant title or title from the champ. He didn't. And then he fought a relatively new champion at 175 and got him to fight at 168. Ray would never have wanted to fight Virgil Hill or Iran Barkley for that matter. Not that he couldn't beat Barkley, but Barkley was maybe a little too big for him.. I know it sounds crazy, but Barkley was a big guy and even with Toney he hit him clean. He hit most guys clean. It was never easy. So Ray would have had a tough fight on his hands even with Barkley, and that fight was available to him also and he didn't pick Barkley. And Virgil had a 77 inch reach and great legs to box around and Ray would have looked like a little guy being outjabbed and just outpointed. Virgil would have really been hard for him. That is why I gave Tommy credit for beating Virgil. Virgil was a great fighter in his own right. ATG? Probably not, but HOF and he could have hung in there with the greats of the past. Maybe not Foster or Spinks too well, but who knows. in his prime he was great and ended up with 25 or so title defenses at 175 and 190. Underrated guy.
Wlliams is now underrated in boxing history. His style baffled me. He was an aggressive swarmer in many fights, when you would think he would be like Hearns and jab and set up his punches. But he was a pressure fighter.
