Being second don't automatically mean its a poor chip. Objectively speaking, if you look at Rocket Lake, it is actually competitive, but letdown by a dated 14nm which results in high power consumption and consequently high heat output. If you are looking for an example of a poor chip, then perhaps Bulldozer will be one that stands out as being poor. FYI, I am using a Zen 3 processor, so to clarify I am not some Intel fanboy. Just stating an objective view here.
I would agree with your second point about Alder Lake. I am skeptical it will turn Intel's fortune around. The odd reason to include efficient cores, i.e. Atom processors or what they call Pentium/Celeron Silver, don't make much sense on a desktop processor. It almost feels like 10nm is not dense enough to accomodate 10 or more cores that they were forced to try to be "creative" and squeeze in efficient cores, instead of performance ones. Net effect, its gonna impact their multicore performance big time even if they market it as 16 cores/ 24 threads. It made sense in the mobile market for sure from a power saving standpoint, but its mostly a poor fit for desktop processors particularly in the DIY market.