Seagull, the running analogy just doesn't work for a bike race. Your analogy of finishing a marathon would be more applicable to finishing a hard timed century, like Six Gap, and to a lesser degree a TT.

In an actual bike race, its all about crossing the finish line first. The amount of time it takes really doesn't matter.

The difference has a lot to do with drafting and the dynamics that creates. Just as an example, assume a 50 mile RR, I go out on an early break, set a blistering pace, get caught with 1km to go and finish dead last, but put in a time of 2 hours even, while the effort is admirable, the result sucks. Conversely, if the same race develops where no one gets away, and the pack slows and starts playing games to set up the sprint, and I take the sprint, but my elapsed time is 2 hours 20 minutes, that is good even if I'm slower.

If we're talking a one day race, its about placing, not time, and running concepts like doing a better time or setting a PR just don't translate.

Do one mass start race, and I think you'll understand.

And the answer to the rhetorical question, so I shouldn't go if I can't win is obviously no, you should go. However when you go you should try to place as high as possible and not in the lowest elapsed time.