The numbers here are chosen by statistical intuition. My intuition is not to be trusted, but I wouldn’t recommend betting money against it either.
Preselection bias is a rapid emotional heuristic that humans have evolved to predict effects of positive manifolds like g. If there are two men, A and B, and it is known that A is physically stronger than B, then preselection predicts that A will also be a faster runner than B. 80% of the time, this will be true. It holds for all sexually desirable traits: intelligence, height, attractiveness, education, strength, speed, health, and so on.
It is extremely effective in societies where breeding choices are made by male political competition, because the male sexual preference is for the absence of defects (low mutation accumulation, attractiveness) rather than specialized traits. These are “competitive” breeding populations (popularized by Anonymous Conservative as “K-selected”) and they are characterized by patriarchy, matrilocalism (males are sent abroad for adventure and to form/join another tribe), linear social hierarchies, aggressive response to threats, low time preference with high value stratification, and heteronomous politics and religious culture (e.g. the RCC, aristocracy). Credo: “The biggest, fastest, and best-looking is also the smartest.” Usually true, but incomplete.
In the upper ranges of ability, a better heuristic is what I call “assumption of specialization”. If a person is in the top 1% of a population with respect to some ability, such as speed, strength, intelligence, and so forth, you should assume that the predictions of the positive manifold heuristic will be far too high. The fastest man in a population of one million is almost certainly not also in the extreme ranges of height or intelligence because at this level of competition those desirable traits actually become liabilities. It is more likely that he is merely above average in those traits (approximately +1 SD for polymorphic traits). This is especially true for abilities that are less “g-loaded”.
This heuristic exists due to eugenic specialization bubbles, which occasionally arise where breeding choices are determined by female political prestige-seeking behavior. The female sexual preference is much more slanted toward preferring highly specialized males (resulting in overselection for recessive genes and novel eugenic mutations) rather than males completely without defect. Such specialization bubbles can only arise within “stress tolerator” breeding populations in response to some kind of extreme environmental pressure. These are characterized by patrilocalism (don’t move the boundary stones!), high status for females in society (not quite matriarchy because violence is a hard restraint), tribalism, low time preference with low value stratification, and defensive insularity in response to threats. Their political, cultural, and religious structures will be autonomous (e.g. Protestantism, anarcho-capitalism).
Human examples of this are fairly infrequent. Jews are a recent example, having become specialized cosmopolitans. Neanderthals appear to have become specialized artisans, growing ridiculously large brains and technically tilted IQs. Puritans, Athenians, and some of the Viking tribes seem to fit a lot of the descriptions above. Extrapolating naively from the human artifacts of these examples in the modern day, it would appear that in the absence of a cohesive tribal response to environmental stress, stress tolerators become ruderal fags. Often this is literal, as in homosexuality, but it includes all aspects of ruderal faggotry such as pedophilia, early sexualization, lack of parental investment in children, atomization, high time preference, passive-aggressive response to threats, and low-investment itinerant lifestyle and work ethic. Ruderal populations are “opportunistic” breeders and socialist democrats, politically.
All political ideology follows from the maxim that humans will advocate an environment that favors evolutionary success for their phenotypal class.