But like Jorgenson said this year, there’s no tactics that can beat Pogi going up a steep hill at 7w/kg. At some point it all comes down to power to weight.

Did tactics have anything to do with how Pogi lost the 2022 TdF on stage 11?

More generally, there is a lot more to each stage and to the race as a whole than the general classification.

If power to weight is all we cared about, we could rank all riders based on their power curve as measured on an indoor trainer and call it a day.

Stage 21 was a great example of how tactics can beat a stronger rider. Pogacar was probably the strongest but Matteo burned up his energy chasing attacks in the final lap and then at the right moment WvA was ready to pounce and take the stage.

Sure it was great to see Wout win again - in Paris no less! And it does kind of validate the TVL strategy of “wear Pogi out with 3 super hard weeks of racing.”

Unfortunately for them it just wasn’t enough to make the difference in the GC.

I wouldn't deny that (and probably should have caveated this in my OP), but compared to a basketball or football team, the benefit of smart play doesn't seem as significant compared to doping up and pressing hard.

>the benefit of smart play doesn't seem as significant compared to doping up and pressing hard.

For the athlete, or for the team?

For professional racing strategy is in the hands of the team members on the sidelines - it's less of a team sport (as in athlete) and more of a group sport (as in information parity.) Whether it's motor races or TdF, there's a significant number of factors to consider. What you are going to have your team do? What are other teams doing? What you should do in response to what they're doing? What will they do in response to your response? What is the average performance of your team? What is the current and maximum performance? What's the condition of the equipment? What tires are being used? What is the forecast for the next few hours? How will changes in weather impact the equipment used? Will you have enough spares to make it through? Do you have good comms between you and the athletes? Etc.

For example, sometimes two athletes on the same team might be one behind the other, only for the coach to tell the lead to let the other teammate to pass. For the audience, it might be unclear why or it might even feel unfair, but there are reasons why they made that call.

Maybe the leader looks gassed and needs to hang back to collect himself.

Maybe they want to encourage the secondary by giving him the reigns for a while, and in turn, push the lead to work harder.

Maybe they want to keep the wear and tear a little lower on the lead by holding him back in case a team close behind ends up overtaking in a sharp turn up ahead.

Maybe they're worried about a pile up that hasn't been cleared yet.

Maybe the sun will be facing the direction of their next turn, so the secondary is providing shade for the lead.

So on and so fourth. An individual athlete can only receive and process so much of that information in a cohesive way.

sure, numerous examples can be shown to say smart play does help. but, would you argue the net benefits of smart play are identical between a sport like basketball and racing?

I don't think I'm well informed enough to answer that. I certainly don't think they are identical, though.

You can break down any activity down to minute detail. It doesn't make it more difficult than another one.

Compare cycling to football (European of course). Nothing about cycling compares to the complex strategy and player skill involved.

I thought the same but after watching the Netflix TdF documentary I would not agree to your statement anymore. Team strategy plays a huge role as e.g. driving in the slipstream saves up to 40% of your energy expenditure.

Not compared to any real team game like football, etc.

Teams in cycling are just there to leverage drafting. It's all pretty boring and just comes down to power output in the end.