Heavyweights: 1) George Foreman 2) Evander Holyfield 3) Tony Tubbs 4) Oliver McCall I had Foreman ahead of Holyfield mainly due to the very high penetration rate of his Y chromosome, and also due to his easier way for achieving it and his better cranial state. McCall below both due to the Y chromosome too, but quite successful too. Hearns' and Liston's parents were very reproductive as well, but since they were not fighters, they do not count here. Other fighters : ? Who else you got ? Descendants of every order count (grand grand grand children count too)
As a former Anthropology major, this is utter & complete nonsense. But you must know that, so go for it.
Unless you assume that their descendants will be discriminated againsy by some (either selective or random) bottleneck, how can you ignore their obvious success? 1 can have the smartest prettiest descendants, but if they die without reproducing, that 1 failed quite a bit. Helping 1's specie/subspecie might be considered as a sort of success as well in a way, but if its own genes vanish, the self evolutionary failure is quite obvious. If you care about a specie as a whole and not about a more specific gene set, I could see a little truth in your belief, but I guess that your reasoning is not this.
It puts him above McCall and anywhere from #1 - #3 , depending on how many of his direct descendants are males and how much did they reproduce.
