“Should you still ride with him, or should you start gambling a bit?” - Tadej Pogacar's rivals questioned after another display of dominance at Tour of Flanders 2026

Tadej Pogacar’s victory at the 2026 Tour of Flanders did more than just settle the result. It reopened a familiar question that continues to follow him through the biggest races. When the race reached its decisive phase, the strongest rider was clear. What remains up for debate is whether those around him could have approached it any differently.

The key selection formed on the sequence of Oude Kruisberg and Hotond, where Pogacar and Mathieu van der Poel moved clear, with Remco Evenepoel briefly close before losing ground. From that point, the race settled into a familiar pattern, with Pogacar driving the pace and the others forced into response.

Even when gaps remained small, they proved difficult to close. The final passage of the Oude Kwaremont then provided the decisive moment, as Pogacar accelerated clear, leaving Van der Poel to chase alone and the rest behind. It was in that context that the tactical question began to take shape.

Sporza commentators Karl Vannieuwkerke and José De Cauwer both raised the dilemma that faced Pogacar’s rivals in real time, particularly as the front group formed and began working together before the final Kwaremont.

“If you know that Pogacar is so dominant, should you still ride with him, or should you start gambling a bit?” Vannieuwkerke asked, even questioning whether pride played a role in how the front group approached the situation. “I’m thinking of Mathieu van der Poel. Or is that sense of pride that gets in the way?”

For De Cauwer, however, the idea of a different tactic came with its own limits, especially given how quickly Pogacar made the difference once the pace lifted on the decisive climbs. “That sense of pride, maybe. But even if they wait, he just drops them again on the next climb. We saw how quickly Pogacar made the difference…” he said, before pointing to how these situations tend to play out at the very front of races. “Those riders are so proud, so great. We’ve seen it so many times. They don’t do that anymore. No, they ride along.”

As the race moved through the Oude Kwaremont and into the Paterberg, that pattern held. Pogacar dictated the terms, Van der Poel followed as long as he could, and the gaps behind grew with Evenepoel unable to close back on.

Attempts to disrupt that rhythm never fully materialised. Each acceleration from Pogacar immediately created separation, leaving little opportunity for hesitation or tactical play.

In that sense, the debate remains unresolved. The question of whether to cooperate or gamble is easy to pose, but far harder to execute when the strongest rider can repeatedly force the same outcome.

The final result appeared to reinforce that idea. “There was nothing to be done against Tadej Pogacar,” Vannieuwkerke said, with De Cauwer in agreement. “I don’t think we’re the only ones saying that. Everyone who saw it up close will agree that there was nothing to be done.”

Behind, the order of the race reflected what had already been seen on the road in the final climbs, where the differences were made. “Fourth place for Wout van Aert is also good, but he too was just that little bit short on the Oude Kwaremont,” Vannieuwkerke noted.

De Cauwer, meanwhile, pointed to how the race unfolded late on. “That second time up the Oude Kwaremont was just too long for him. Towards the end, he came through a bit again, but he had to do it alone,” he explained. “They all finished where they belong.”

For Vannieuwkerke, the race could be reduced to a simple conclusion. “It was a five-star Tour of Flanders, and the five-star favourite won,” he said, summing up the hierarchy that played out across the final. “The man who also got five stars, but maybe should have had four, finished second. Those who were given three stars ended up in third, fourth and fifth.”

It was a summary that reflected how the race had unfolded, with the decisive moves on the cobbles ultimately settling both the result and the debate.