exactly: the World's were partly won because of tactical errors of the main adversaries, while the Tour of Flanders was won without (stronger) adversaries making tactical errors, but just because Pogacar was stronger, and this with a MUCH higher normalized power than Remco in the World's.Other than the MVDP hotel incident all the big guns for a course like that were there in Australia. The leaders could have gone in the move Remco went away in but held back conservatively expecting the race to come back to them and finding out it would not do so. Their fault for a tactical error.
So I consider Pogacar's Flanders win of a higher level, in terms of effort, than Remco's World's.