No, but at the same time she certainly wasn't the last choice either on a course like this. That's why they put her in the break, she was too dangerous to other teams to be allowed that much space, and as somebody that the Dutch could likely trust to take it home from the group they had up the road; with the likes of Vos and Pieters for a sprint and van der Breggen and van Vleuten for a more selective outcome also in the race she could sit up and make the others do the work if it came to it in the latter stages, they would hope that she could outclimb Barnes (although Barnes has been really impressively durable this season it must be said) and outsprint Cordon-Ragot, so if that group succeeded, they'd have the upper hand.
It's not surprising that the Dutch would outnumber the other teams at the end, especially once Longo Borghini was out, leaving Italy a bit less strong up front and reliant on a few interesting moves that weren't given the leeway they might have hoped. It's no secret that I'm a fan of Rossella Ratto, and I was happy to see that she was strong and taking those risks late on in such a long race; the fallout from the Estado de México collapse and that she's never settled at a team has been a real staller for her development, after such a great start to her career, but ultimately when the A-listers put their cards on the table, the Italians had no response. It was intriguing that the Dutch would take control of the pacing, although whether that was in the intention of allowing Blaaki the freedom not to work up front or because they had a chaque that the gap wasn't enough and wanted to burn off sprinters I'm not sure. It certainly wasn't surprising that the big attack to make the selection came from Niewiadoma, but the problem that is the super-strength marchers in orange meant that even once she'd trimmed the group of those who had looked strong in the initial forays, such as Ferrand-Prévot, and made it into the selection that we thought would contest the medals, the Dutch held all the cards and realistically it was just a matter of which of them was away when the elastic snapped.
Now, it may not have been Chantal's original move that had had this effect had Garfoot contributed, sure, and I suspect this gambit was similar to the Spanish one in 2009 that eventually cost them the gold in the men's RR, with Rodríguez, who had been in the early break, the one to attack, so when Evans shook Samu and Valverde off his wheel, they were left waiting on Cancellara, while the exhausted Rodríguez couldn't answer Evans' attack - send the most tired rider up the road first, to foster indecision in the chase with two fresh riders sitting on. And Blaak is plenty strong enough to pull it off from that kind of position, as we've seen from previous solo wins in places like the Boels Rentals Tour and Gent-Wevelgem. It is ironic, therefore, that Australia have picked up (and not without reason) this reputation for negative racing in the major one day events in national teams, yet the one time they've successfully taken it to the house was with a rider with a negative reputation taking unexpected risks and completely rejuvenating himself. Ultimately, the chase had to be led by Kasia and Garfoot, because Barnes and Cordon were willing contributors but were exhausted; Kasia did her bit but she also has the problem that of the 7, in a sprint to the line you would expect her to have little to no chance. She's also spent a lot of the last two seasons getting worked over when isolated in similar fashion, doing far more work than she should and getting dusted in the sprint at the end, or left behind by opposition doing the double or triple team, be it Boels or Wiggle or Orica in the trade events, or the Dutch or Australians in the national events. Garfoot's gambit may have been less negatively received had she not done a Gerrans and then acted upset by the silver medal. Ultimately, we should remember Emma Johansson at the Olympics. She still got a silver, when she would win a sprint vs. van der Breggen 9 times out of 10, and if she sat on and let Mara win, she'd have won the sprint for silver and not lost anything. But she sacrificed her sprint in order to have a chance to sprint for the gold. Emma had a right to be disappointed. If you didn't contribute to the chase in the hope of winning the sprint, you have no right to be upset that that sprint is for a silver medal.
Now, in response to the comment about Amalie being the lucky medal, let it be known that I agree. That doesn't mean I don't wholelheartedly respect her defence of her championship, but that sextet behind Blaak should never have been caught. Yes, that's mainly due to them essentially being limited in numbers due to having at least 2 (arguably 3 with Garfoot not contributing) passengers, so while it's great of the bunch not to have given up in pursuit of the minor medals, and she deserves it for having that sprint left and being the best of the sprinters behind, she also can count herself lucky to have been granted that opportunity by the group in front.
It was interesting that the UK team decided to spend Barnes on that early move, clearly Lizzie was as usual the main plan, but it actually shows evidence of a plan B. However, having her used like that so early in the race did have a negative effect in the long run, in that she was clearly spent because she was the strongest sprinter of the chasing six and yet was completely blown out of the water in the sprint to the line. Similarly, Australia's tactics were somewhat baffling, although clearly Sarah Roy is turning into more than a fast finisher, you would have thought she was not the engine that they would want to burn in a chasse-patate like that. I know that the silver medal will be claimed as vindication of their work, but everything from the selection controversy to the negative race tactics point to a fairly difficult picture at Cycling Australia. It was hard to see how most teams would find their way around trying to beat the Dutch superteam, admittedly, but placement riding is even more frustrating in single-day racing than it is in stage racing, and I'm not sure how the team can argue that they thought Garfoot not contributing to the chase was in any way a strategy for victory, at least from that selection, unless they thought Gillow, Spratt or the exhausted Roy could have won the sprint from the péloton, which seems fanciful.
Now, who will be favourites next year? If their years are anything like this one, then Annemiek and Anna VDB will obviously be candidates, along with Kasia, Ash Moolman-Pasio, Longo Borghini, but what of development for Cille and Nosková? How about PFP transitioning back to a heavier road calendar? Having won the Supergà nationals, can Cecchini survive the climbs? Will Amialiusik be able to return? Will Jolanda return to the road? Will a new climbing queen emerge? Will my endless protests be heard and Claudia Lichtenberg reverse her retirement decision in order to ride such a challenging World Championships so close to home?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram