As a Belgian, I just finished crying.-
Great race though. Alaphillipe was the best and I'm not sure any tactic, besides having a WVA or MVP 100%, would have been enough to keep him from becoming WC again.
Looking back, you could argue that having remco ride for WVA was a fault. However, the French did the same with Cosnefroy and that seems to be a masterstroke of Voeckler. The winner is always right.
Let's hope it doesn't take another 20 years to have another WC in Belgium.
I feel with you Belgians. The crowds on the streets were incredible, probably not always cycling fans, but it made for a memorable atmosphere even on the tv.
The French gave up Cosnefroy (and Turgis) early (which really surprised me and he finished still pretty high, shows that he had a great day and hopefully he's indeed the next Ala

), but they still had Sénéchal as a co-leader, who was spared and who Ala even was ready to work for, so it was actually not really a 1man approach.
I do see four major differences between the French and the Belgian team:
- van Aert is a great time trialer, a great climber, a big engine - but what stands out the most is that he's a non-pure sprinter who's able to outsprint pure sprinters. So the Belgians, not totally unsurprising, wanted a sprint. Therefor they rode comparatively conservative, while France knew their finishing riders would profit from a hard race, so they rode extremely active and made the race hard.
- It's obviously also a question of cycling mentality, the French riders overall still seem to very much have a thing for this active, heroic racing with "panache". It's probably especially heralded in the media and from coaches, I suppose.
- It's always hard to judge from the outside, but the French seem indeed to be more of a unit, with a rider like Cosnefroy or last year Martin willing to give everything for their team leader(s), and no bad feelings coming through.
- Alaphilippe was not the pre-race favourite. In fact, even though he seemed to be on many lists as a favourite, for many (including me) that was more a "cannot be discounted as the current world champion" than taking him actually seriously. He just didn't seem at his best before the race. And he so often attacked without any result during the year, especially during the Tour, that people simply underestimated him. I don't know how much truth is in there and how much that is an excuse from one or the other rider, but many riders like Colbrelli, Pidcock for instance said they thought Ala's moves weren't the real ones, that they looked at van Aert and van der Poel, that they thought Ala was just getting excited again and couldn't make it stick. Stuyven and van Baarle also deliberately didn't immediately follow him, but wanted to be sure first it was okay with their team. When Alaphilippe was the favourite in Innsbruck and Harrogate that didn't work out for him, but these last times, when Wout was the favourite, Ala was not only extremely strong, he also profited from his "underdog" status.