“You can win races by being smarter” – Mathieu van der Poel on why power numbers do not decide the Spring Classics, even in the Pogacar era

In the modern peloton, few riders carry the same aura of inevitability as Tadej Pogacar. His accelerations are measured, his dominance often explained through numbers, and his presence alone can force races into submission. Yet as the Spring Classics approach once again, Mathieu van der Poel is offering a reminder that the most chaotic races on the calendar are not won by watts alone.

“You can also win races by being smarter, or by doing the right things at the right moment,” Van der Poel said on the Whoop podcast, outlining a philosophy forged not in training files, but in the pressure points of one-day racing.

Van der Poel’s explanation of the Spring Classics begins not with power, but with panic. Narrowing roads. Bottlenecks. Moments where the race explodes, not because someone attacks, but because space disappears.

“Positioning is super important,” he said. “We have key points. We go from big roads to a smaller climb, and you have to be in the first twenty riders. Because if there is a move and you are too far back, it is impossible. Even with the best numbers, it is impossible to be in the front group.”

It is a reality Pogacar knows as well as anyone. Their recent clashes across Milano-Sanremo, the Tour of Flanders and Paris-Roubaix have shown how often races between them are decided before the decisive attack is even launched. Being strong is essential. Being present is non-negotiable. “You need the numbers,” Van der Poel acknowledged. “But you can also win races by being smarter.”

Van der Poel draws a clear line between stage racing logic and the one-day chaos of the Classics.

“On the climbs, the power numbers speak for themselves. Most of the time, the strongest guy wins,” he said, describing the Tour de France and similar races. In contrast, the Spring Classics compress decisions into moments, not minutes.

“In classic races, you have a lot of different race situations, a lot of tactics. That is what makes it exciting.”

It is also what has defined his rivalry with Pogacar. When the Slovenian rider applies sustained pressure, Van der Poel’s advantage often lies in surviving the storm and exploiting what comes next. Timing, positioning, and instinct become as decisive as any threshold value.

That tactical edge is not accidental. Van der Poel credits experience and team structure as the only way to survive the constant fight for position that defines the Classics.

“We are 180 guys, and they all know where to be,” he said. “So it is always a big battle to be in front. You need a good team, good teammates, and you need experience to know how to get there.”

It is a subtle insight into why recent Classics have so often become two-man affairs between him and Pogacar. Both arrive not just strong, but prepared. Both understand where races are won long before the finish line comes into view.

As another Spring unfolds, the narrative will again focus on whether anyone can match Pogacar’s engine. Van der Poel’s answer is not to deny it, but to reframe the contest.

The Spring Classics, he suggests, are not a laboratory. They are a battlefield. Numbers matter, but only if you are in the fight when it begins.

And in those moments, being the strongest rider on paper is no guarantee of winning at all.