Let's take a look at this two models and see witch one makes more sense:

Model 1 (the big triangle): on top of it, we would have our super alphas, packed with all the desirable traits, (good looking, super smart, 8 ft tall millionaires), the platonic male ( the ideal man), the one answer you get when you get when you ask women (btw that's your fault if you ask).

If this hypothesis is true, the selection process would look like this:

she would take all your traits ( e.g. your credit score, that Judo medal you won when you were 8)

she would give each trait a certain relative weight,

she would calculate a score comparing you with all the human males he has notion off, real or not (that means you would be competing against batman)

she compares it to her own self perceived score ( she's a 12, of course)

she fucks you or not (probably not, she would rather fuck that guy from the perfume add on TV)

Model 2 ( the equilateral triangle model): each triangle represents an specific environment ( her work office, the bar she goes to on Saturday night , her yoga class)

If this hypothesis is true, the selection process would look like this:

She would try to identify the best catch in each space, the top of that triangle ( the coolest guy in the bar)

she would fuck that guy

In this model with enough edge traits ( not that common desirable characteristics) in a specific environment, you are as fuckable as Brad Pitt.

Right guy right place.