If one has an athlete that has an opportunity to make The Worlds but must do his national championships (AND must pretty much be in peak shape for this), how does one plan for him to be at his peak for his trials whilst maintaining his strength enough so as to be possibly better at the Worlds themselves. I ask because Charlie has said that one can maintain strength for only 8 weeks before one starts to lose it. As he states, peaking should occur after about 5 or 6 weeks of strength maintenance. However if one has to give it 5 weeks to make sure that the athlete is in good enough shape for the trials and then it is a further 6 -7 weeks before the main event PLUS competitions during this period, would the athlete not have lost too much strength (11-12 weeks since last week of SPP) to be as effective later on?
You need to provide far more info to get an answer.
1: Is selection at risk or is it a sure thing?
2: How many rounds in the trials?
3: What is the actual time spread between?
4: How many preliminary meets do you plan before the trials and between the trials and the big meet?
The apparent spread you indicate is pretty typical and manageable but the effect may be influenced by the number of rounds in the trials. The American trials with the full Olympic schedule seemed to hurt the Americans while the Jamaicans were unaffected by their trials at the same time with less rounds, even where the competition was as tough.
Hi Charlie
Thanks for the response.
1: Selection is at risk. Obviously at this stage without knowing how much the opposition are going to step up this season it is not possible to say for sure. But based on last season the athlete would have to be in peak shape.
2/3: There are (usually) 3 rounds for the 100m and 3 for the 200m. Friday 100m r1; Saturday 100m semi + Final plus 200m r1; Sunday 200m semi + final.
4: The athlete would ideally look to race within two weeks after of the end of the outdoor special preparation period looking to have four 100m races and a couple of races at 200m before the trials over a period of five weeks with room for a 10 day taper. After the trials the only meets I can see are the big European meets (e.g. Paris, Crystal Palace, Stockholm, etc) so there is the additional problem of, even if successful, getting the athlete included in meets with so little time to negotiate entry into them.
The system used is Long to short.
1: As you know, it isn’t always possible to peak in the same way in both events, since, in the window of opportunity you can shift more to the right to improve the chances at the trials (what you need to do) or shift a bit to the left to leave the big meet in the sweetest spot.
This applies mainly to top athletes who are close to their ultimate performance, however, an improving athlete who scores PBs at the trials may well generate a bigger rebound with increased performance at the big meet with sufficient care in scheduling/competing.
2/3: That’s better for the scenario I envision in point 1 than a four round deal as in the US trials last year.
4: In a L-to-S plan, it is critical to get in the number of races ideal to a peak (more critical than in S-to-L because you have a shorter time at max velocities beforehand) so you need to fit in 5 100’s and 3 to 4 200s before the 10day taper.
Be sure to get that 10day taper video to see how that can be managed in reality- not just theory!
Thanks
If improvement is significant (based on training times compared to the previous year- as seems to be indicated currently), could an athlete do their SPP much closer to the trials, possibly even competing during the SPP (by using one or two low level comps to replace SE and to sharpen up a little as I doubt that they are going to be so superior as to be able to approach the trials without competition beforehand)? If so would reducing the volume of max strength work such as 2x3@90% for lower body strength work whilst mixing the odd competition? By doing this the athlete would be in a better position to peak for the main event (i.e. Worlds).
Also if athlete had done short to long is the shorter time at SE a reason to emphasize more 200m races (opposite to the L-TO-S need to maximise max velocity)?
P.s 10 day taper (Essential viewing) 
well I wouldn’t make big changes for two reasons:
1:The plan has been working
2:The athlete needs to qualify first before worrying about Worlds.
Get in the meets before the trials as I suggested.
With the weights, you should be able to go with 3s lower body for some time and still have the capacity to drop the numbers but I’d stay at 95% and above. Remember, the same weight/rep scheme will actually get easier due to familiarity, allowing comp to coincide, before the plateau begins to cause strength losses. At that point you can reduce reps/poundage.
Your last point about the difference in race numbers between 100s and 200s is prob valid up to a point though I wouldn’t go below 4 for the 100 even with S-to-L.
With L-to-S, you might get away with 3 rather than 4 200s due to the SE background difference but with the possibility of doubling in meets, it would be unlikely to find enough of one event but not the other.
Thanks Charlie
Will let you know how it goes.