i was reading tigeredge's great post and it got me thinking. here is something worth mentioning, the division was weak at the time but regardless, if it wasent for the great thomas hearns virgil hill would have made 21 title defenses! :admin one more then bernard hopkins title defenses at middle and not a shabby list either; maske, tate, washington, czyz, stewart, kinchen and del valle. the silver medal at korea (beating michael nunn in the box offs) and also winning the cruiser weight title at 42:shock: would that have made him great?
Hill is an example of how a very good fighter can dominate a weak era and have an impressive resume ... Hill was a well conditioned, consistant, one handed fighter with a big heart, a boring style, a good chin and inconsistant power. He was also boring as hell to watch. If he fought in the late 70's to early 80's, a golden era at light heavyweight, he loses to Conteh, Galindez, Lopez, Saad, Mustafa, Johnson, Qwai and Spinks. Possibly Eddie Davis and James Scott as well. In the 80's - 90's he has 20 defenses ... that's that !
I think Vrigil is an excellent fighter, and maybe he underestimated Hearns, as some sort of exhibition fight that night. It definitely hurt his legacy, but overall Hill was an excellent fighter.
