Yes, Cancellara is fast, smart and strong - but what was Boonen to do?

Riis is a bit biased in this, and he does make a good point about the timing of Cancellara's attack - but what was Boonen to do? He had already attacked on the cobbles to thin the lead bunch out, and he had softened a few legs. But he had to rest at some point, regather his energy, have a bite to eat. Cancellara had only to follow his wheel, match his attacks and wait for the moment. Which he did.

And when the break was made, Boonen was down the back of an elite bunch. He would have expected someone else to chase Cancellara, but of course they didn't. Not with commitment anyway. And why should they tow sprinters like Hushovd and Boonen to the line, anyway? So there you have it - Boonen needed a rest after doing a lot of legwork, and noone was going to tow the others back to Cancellara. So Boonen was trapped. Had he been more alert and closer to Cancellara he may well have responded and brought him back, but he had already done too much.

And if he'd done nothing? 

Riis Reveals The Secret Of Cancellara's Roubaix Attack | Cyclingnews.com

"Boonen is strong but Cancellara is better. He's great," he said with total admiration.

"Boonen made mistakes during the race. How many? Two can be too many. I think if you want to win this race you have to stay calm, relaxed and not stressed. Then go when you have to go.

"The problem for the others is that Fabian goes fast, even on his own. We know that and it's a bonus to have. We know he can go from far away, too, so we use this as part of our strategy. Not many riders can do that."

Tom, we forgive you - but...

Forgetting to eat? We've all done that in a 260km bike race, haven't we? Run out of gas? Ditto. Preferring to take 4th rather than 2nd? Not so sure about that one.

Boonen Rues Lapse In Concentration At Roubaix | Cyclingnews.com

"I felt good but in the finale I ran out of gas. I had given a lot in the chase to keep it going and then I forgot to eat. Afterwards it was a battle for second place, but I preferred not to finish second today."

OK, so I watched it on replay - The Paris-Roubaix

I wasn't going to stay up that late, although it would've been good practice for Le Tour...

Anyway, did anyone actually get a surprise out of Boonen winning? Or Boonen out-sprinting Cancellara and Ballan? I thought not. Still, it's the whole drama of the thing that matters and once again the race was full of "ouch, that hurt", "can he bridge that gap?", "will the break succeed?" and "will they work together or play a tactical game?" before we got to the final selection. And gosh those cobbles look hard to ride on.

Kelly, O'Grady, Paris-Roubaix and Le Tour

OK, it's stunning. Stuart O'Grady has won Paris-Roubaix. It's (sadly) not big news here in Australia, at least we haven't heard a lot about it yet - but it should be HUGE. Hopefully as the news filters through it will get some more attention.

As Cyclingnews points out today, "In addition to first being the race's first Australian victor, O'Grady became the first English-speaking rider since the great Sean Kelly to win Paris-Roubaix, and not only the first Australian, but indeed the first cyclist from any Commonwealth country to win this race (Kelly is from Eire, which is not part of the Commonwealth). And the last time O'Grady won a race on a velodrome, it was nothing less than a Gold medal in the Madison at the Athens 2004 Olympics (with Graeme Brown)."

Before Stuey won I was going to note (as Irish hard-man and road sprinter Sean Kelly does here in Cyclingnews) that the way pro riders target their season has changed over the last 20-30 years. CN also recently reported that "the last time a rider did the Paris-Roubaix-Tour de France double was Bernard Hinault in 1981. Before that, Eddy Merckx took both races in 1971. Merckx was the last rider to win the Tour and triumph in Flanders in the same year, way back in 1969." Stuey won't win Le Tour but he has worn the Maillot jaune.

It's interesting that Stuey is a little in Kelly's mould. A hard man, known for his sprinting as well as his versatility. Kelly was arguably a better sprinter but the way he toughed it out in the mountains was a rare treat. Stuey too has been known to have a dig in the high stuff, if there was a sniff of some time to be gained on GC. But Roubaix is dead flat and cobbled, so this win is a monument to O'Grady's versatility.

Thinking along these lines, these days we don't expect to see a sprinter like Boonen contest the GC at Le Tour, as we didn't expect to see Armstrong do Paris-Roubaix; whereas Merckx and Hinault contested the classics, the GC, the mountains... even the sprints. We can expect nothing less than increasing specialisation over time if the individual targets are worth it - and that's exactly what has happened. Le Tour is so big that it alone justifies a rider's salary. Whilst we have always had some specialists - it's a physiological thing after all - it wasn't possible for a pro to to make enough money (or even to retain their place in a team) without riding lots of races over the course of a year and being good at more than type of race. Which is why we'll 'never' see another Merckx, if things stay as they are but will 'probably' see more Armstrongs, Boonens and - I hope - more O'Gradys.