But I think you have often seen in a favorite-underdog pair such a situation that the favorite plays a suboptimal strategy, and the underdog plays a counter-strategy to the favorite's strategy, but the favorite still wins. So you can't explain everything by tactics. The game lasted 90 minutes and Enrique had time to change something, but the game ended not 3-1 or 3-2 but 3-0. I think the reasons are more complex than just winning because of one tactic.
Enzo Maresca outsmarted him with the tactics they used so Enrique was confused on what to do till the goal got to 3 and he totally ran out of thoughts. If you noticed Chelsea dominated the first half they didn't even give PSG players time to restrategize cause they defended and attacked very well thereby causing PSG to run out of options they only managed to perform well in the second half.
It seems you really think that if we take for example the prime Real and Leganes, but Leganes chooses the best tactics for the game, then Real will literally be unable to do anything and will lose
Okaaaay.The fallacy of single-factor analysis is as obvious as it is widespread. However, all the better, let's see how good Maresca will be in the upcoming season and how you explain Chelsea's other results (obviously there will be both wins and losses).