I read in a thread on this forum SOMEWHERE that peaking can be delayed by appropriate use of tempo in comp season. How so?
The volume and intensity of Intensive Tempo may allow you to maintain work capacity so when it is time to peak you have “something” to taper off of.
That is my thoughts on it anyway.
We can agree to disagree:
1: The intensity of the peak load requires differentiation on alternate days. IE extreme performances on the track and in the weight room require a lower rate for tempo to allow adequate recovery 9this does not mean that the tempo work is not challenging but that challenge comes primarily from short recoveries.
1a: I guess the corollary to that might be: the lower the quality of Speed or Speed Endurance, the more intensive tempo could be used?? I never subscribed to that but I can’t rule it out either.
2: Using intensive tempo to delay a peak (ie as a means to lengthen the stress of training) mitigates against the quality of Speed and Speed Endurance it is possible to generate.
I think the nature of the original question was that keeping a sufficient volume of tempo allows for a longer period of peak performance than would be possible if it were dropped in the pre-comp phase.
I’ve never tried it, but if it’s to be used, early in the season seems to be the right time. Could this, however, make the distinction you suggest for later on in the season even more profound? Perhaps I am using Your logic from GPP to SPP, where all HI elements are eventually employed on the same day… Thanks!
Yes. This is my thinking. This past season I have dropped all acceleration work, max velocity speed work, and did basically Submax speed endurance and intensive tempo every other day with my recovery days consiting of runs which would be considered fast for extensive tempo 6-8x200 in 30" (72%) as opposed to running 100’s and 200’s in 17"/34" pace. In this time I beat my old 200 PR 4 times which ironically was from 5 years ago when I was again on an intensive tempo program. AND…in this amount of time I also beat my old 60 PR 3 times. To top things off the last 2 weeks of this season I dropped most of my volume and my only “speed day” was 5x80 @ 90% approx 9.7 indoors with 3’ rest and finished the season off with 2 PR’s going 22.43 and 7.09.
Yes CF, that is the question, although the other contributions are appreciated and helpful.
I am using a Hi-low format in comp season and as you know, I work w/ HS kids. There are usually 2 days of ext tempo per week then as we progress into the conf championships then regions, I will decrease tempo to probably about 800m per week. I will utilize Int tempo during season up until about a week from conf champs. I figure by then the actual race will provide what is needed for endurance and int tempo or specific speed endurance for races. Rest will become key.
Sounds to me like you burn out quick or your lifting or something else is too intense preventing you from recovering. Certainly I have found that with atheltes around 10.8/7.0/21.5 they often seem to need significantly more 95% days than what appears to have been suggested on the forum. Also, with lower level athletes I’ve found that you only ever use 2 high days a week (with the other 3 being low for them). And as you say when you do more 95% work you can work more on tempo. Certainly this seems to work more for this level of athlete in my experience.
Your athletes seem to need significantly more 95% days so you only use 2 high days a week 
So overall intensity is reduced compared with say a high level athlete - both density and intensity of high intensity are less. Still works fine.
Why are you so surprised? Or how do we know they need more H.I. days? I presume we are not talking about professionals here and other life-stresses should be taken into account. Sometimes, if not most of the time for non-elite athletes, you have to go with what you can afford rather than the ideal. I am sure you are aware of that, just making a note! 
Another thing that’s interesting is what quikazhell says. If this is what works for you, that’s fine, of course! A friend of mine -full time athlete- doesn’t seem to cope with more one sprint session per week (>95%) and even this has to be placed carefully into the week. It works for him, too. Perhaps quickazhell is overdoing it in other aspects (?), but thus far who can argue with his improvement?
There may also be a trade-off with the weights with your weight work taking primacy over other elements. You could look at the total number of reps per week above 80% in all lifts and see what it looks like.
Hi everybody, my name is sonicboom.
I am happy to let the hostile takeover continue, but please remember post #6, then do what you may!! 
Ah I see I was thinking that by saying 95% days you meant that they needed more hi days. You are talking about them needing 95% days in comparison with 100% days?
Yes. When you run 21.5 you don’t have any physio or massage on a regular basis so you can’t always handle what people with better recovery strategies can do. So we spend more time doing 95% work than perhaps the 3 up 1 down would suggest.