Sequencing two A races 4-8 weeks apart

The problem with two A races close together

The Hub computes a full Base / Build / Peak / Taper / Recovery cycle around each A race. For two A races within 8 weeks, those cycles overlap: the recovery from the first race overlaps the taper for the second, leaving no real build window between them.

The season view will draw it, but the structure does not fully fit. The right move is usually to downgrade one of them in your head (and on the priority tag) so the plan is realistic.

Two A races 4 weeks apart

Realistically impossible to peak for both. Options:

• Treat the first as the priority A (full taper, full effort) and the second as a hard training day (downgrade to B or C on the priority tag).
• Treat the second as the priority A (full taper from the first race onward; the first race becomes a hard effort with a 5-day taper).

Either is defensible. The athlete will be fresher for one and dragging for the other. Pick which one to be fresh for.

Two A races 5-6 weeks apart

A short build of about 2 weeks is possible between them, but intensity has to be earned: the athlete just raced. Plan:

• Week minus 5 to minus 4 from race 2: recover from race 1 (low intensity, low volume).
• Week minus 3 to minus 2: short build with one intensity session per discipline.
• Week minus 1: shortened taper (5 to 7 days, similar to a B race taper).

The expected fitness for race 2 is not higher than race 1. Pacing should reflect that.

Two A races 7-8 weeks apart

This is closer to workable. A meaningful build window exists:

• Recovery week after race 1 (volume to 60 percent, no intensity).
• Build week 1: re-introduce intensity at threshold (one session per discipline).
• Build week 2-3: peak-style intensity.
• Taper (2 weeks for the second A race, treated as a B taper because the build is short).

The athlete can credibly target similar performance for race 2, possibly a small gain.

What the Hub will and will not enforce

• The season view draws all the phases as if both races get a full cycle. Visual overlap is the signal to make a call.
• The macrocycle plan does not auto-resolve the conflict. You decide which race owns the build and which race rides the residual.
• The race priority tag drives nothing automatically at the macrocycle level beyond the season view phases. The priority is a signal to you and to the athlete, not a scheduler constraint.

How to communicate to the athlete

A short CoachNote on the second race makes the strategy explicit. Example wording:

Race 2 is 5 weeks after race 1. The plan has 1 recovery week and 2 build weeks between them, then a 2-week mini taper. Pace expectations: similar to race 1 swim and bike, slightly slower run because the run accumulates the fatigue.

See also: A vs B vs C race tagging, Race week taper by priority, Macrocycle plan basics.