I actually felt like the poor tactics of Yeshaneh stood out to me more than the excellent tactic of Peres. Every time Yeshaneh covered a move of Peres's, she went straight back to the lead and let Peres sit on her until the next move. She did a lot of work at the end of the race without ever making a move that had any chance of dropping Peres. The way she covered Peres's moves made me think she had the most energy left, but she kept wasting it by moving back into the lead unnecessarily.
Yeshaneh also looked antsy and impatient, checking her watch a dozen or more times in the last mile. I have a hard time seeing any reason to be checking your watch that much at any point in the race, let alone at the end when your focus should be on competing. Maybe one or two checks to gauge how much longer you have to go in the last mile, but it was like a nervous habit for her. And if she was trying to see her current pace, that really shouldn't matter, it's all based on feel at that point anyway.
As for Peres's tactics, I agree with another poster that waiting a bit longer for a single hard move might have worked better, or at least just as well. But she did make the right call when she got caught after her first move to let Yeshaneh go by her (couldn't tell if she deliberately slowed down or not, but didn't look like it). The second move onto Hereford seemed questionable. Moving at the bottom of that incline with ~800m to go is a hard place to go unless you're really feeling good, and she immediately got caught and re-passed. Though Yeshaneh did take that turn oddly wide (another poor move on her part) so maybe she saw another opportunity.
At any rate, to me this race was not clear evidence that Peres is the smartest race in marathon running. It obviously worked out, but if Yeshaneh had been smarter, Peres's first two moves could have backfired and opened the door for her to get beaten in the final stretch.
