What is the top predator in the ocean besides man?

[Witis]

Consider that your criteria would rank a moose ahead of a wolf unless you put considerable emphasis on the ability of a wolf to outlast a moose in an endurance race (which may or may not be true). In all other ways, according to your criteria, a moose would thrash a wolf, yet we know that wolves eat moose. In otherwords, your criteria are flawed because they would create absurd outcomes. They are only true if you endow all contestants with human intelligence for the duration of the match. Since that premise is fanciful, the results are equally so. Your contestants need to know the objective of the match for them to be able to win. Without that knowledge, they may lose without ever realizing that they are in a contest.

Don't agree, why would the moose rank ahead of a wolf? Please provide the scientific facts which indicate this to be the case.

As an example, consider the Mayan cichlid that I mentioned in an earlier thread. The Mayan cichlid is a small, colorful, fish found largely in central America (and introduced into other sub-tropical waters). They are incredibly aggressive. Put one into a fish tank, and it will kill off anything else it identifies as living, if it can do so. We only got three other animals to survive in a tank with it: Two sedentary fish that it didn't recognize as being living, and a turtle, which it attacked relentlessly and futily. Was the Mayan cichlid superior or inferior to the three animals it didn't kill? Was it really superior to the animals that it DID kill (which included other Mayan cichlids, which would make it superior to itself)? The cichlid has no teeth, isn't very fast, isn't camouflaged, has no poison, is pretty small, and has no other remarkable attributes other than raw aggression. The gar that was in the tank with it has real teeth, terrific speed (in short bursts), and a natural camouflage. It was only the latter that kept it alive, since the cichlid didn't attack it. The armored catfish, which was the other surviving fish, has no teeth, modest protection, and is virtually immobile. Once again, it was the latter that protected it, because the cichlid never attacked it. The turtle would be superior in your heirarchy, as would the gar, yet all four species co-existed in close proximity for a considerable length of time.

Raw aggression is not going to help much against a superior predator, don't overestimate your cichlid despite its head count.

This is the flaw of your design: The animals have to know that there is a competition for it to even work. Since that doesn't happen, reality is not going to match your model.

Don't agree, as soon as involuntary carnivores become hungry they will use all of their strengths to try and catch their dinner which exactly matches my method for determining the top predator.

Fortunately, you do have one great advantage: Only a human would be foolish enough to believe their model is a superior representation of reality than reality is itself.

It is an attempt to determine the actual (real) topmost pelagic predator and I stand by my results.

Therefore, none of the other animals outside of the human race will ever snicker at your conclusions.

I very much doubt that any reasonably intelligent life forms would ever snicker at any attempt to use science to try to determine the real answer to quite a difficult issue.