hrotha said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayHPWnb1ZRo
It's not like QS are guaranteed to play their cards right every time.
Well that was a very specific scenario, and Stannard won for a number of reasons:
1) Vandebergh is an idiot;
2) Stannard was clearly the strongest rider in the race;
3) There was no other non-QS rider in the group, so Stannard had only one strategy available: close down any attack himself and pull like a madman hoping he was the strongest rider in the race. He didn't have to worry about dragging a faster rider to the finish, he didn't have to think about what to do, just pull.
4) Vanderbergh is tactically inept.
Whereas in the current cobbled races:
1) No VDB;
2) All QS riders are on the same page and tactically sound;
3) There is no rider who can make the difference like Stannard did in that race;
4) Whenever a QS rider attacks, other riders will always start looking at each other. One because he is tired, one because he has a teammate in the break, one because he doesn't want to drag Sagan to the finish only to be outsprinted. And so on. Groups rarely work together in this kind of races.
So in races where strength matters a lot, like De Ronde, I give the other riders very slim chances of winning (unless some QS riders crash or they decide for whatever reason to ride difensively like in GW).
In a race like PR, where luck and other thing must be factored in, I give the other riders a better shot, but still less than 50%.