"When training a more highly developed crossfit athletes such as Jocelyn, have you switched to more of a 90% o-lifting cycle with only maintenance for metcon? Or have you found it more successful to stick with a format such as the one you posted?"
I do not ever, even if there is a fire, stick to one format. Highly developed, or not. And I do not stick to a 90% format for the o'lifting cycles. I use progressions and make changes weekly in metcon reps and intensity and/or strength reps and intensity based on performance, body recovery, and life. Also, in weeks that the strength work is reaching 90%+ I adjust the metcon reps accordingly so the body is recovered and prepared for the demands of the strength work, and vice versa.
"Also, with the snatch+overhead squat and Front squat+Jerk combo lifts, are these primarily a way to cover more in less time? Or are they better served to develop the lifts whose percentages they are based off of?"
No, I don't cut corners and try to cover less in more time. Those are used to develop strength, and technique, in the fatigued state. For example, doing a jerk after a clean + a front squat is a lot harder than doing it right after a clean. This is just a way to apply strength in an uncomfortable situation, and build up conditioning in a strength aspect. So essentially, it not only strengthens the lift we may be targeting, but it allows the athlete to develop overall strength, and conditioning, at higher percentages, which ultimately is geared towards increasing the 1RM.
"I was wondering something similar. With such short metcons, were they just maintaining an aerobic ability/work capacity/whatever, that she already had? Or were they developing it further?"
Both. My metcons always have a plan- based on the week, what we are trying to accomplish or develop, and what the athlete's strengths and weaknesses are. Also, they may look short but they are very demanding. A huge misconception, I believe, is that a workout has to be 20+ minutes long, and completely puking insane, for it to be successful.
At this time in the cycle(s) we were working on Joc's ability to string more muscle ups together when fatigued. So the metcon:
AMRAMP 6 minutes
6 DB thrusters
was designed so that she could, in hopes, get all 3 MU's unbroken, each round of the 6 minutes. The DB thrusters were heavy, to fatigue her enough that she would have to focus on getting her MU's unbroken, but not too many reps so that she couldn't maintain intensity each round. She was learning to keep the intensity the same every round she did. By keeping the reps short, it allows her to move so quickly that she never has a chance to spend so long on one exercise that she still isn't tired from the last time she did it. Meaning, by only doing 6 DB thrusters, likely she wasn't fully recovered from doing the last 3 MU's, and now she will already have to do them again. These short metcons, which are often heavy or highly skilled, (if you read her article) actually better prepared her for longer metcons then dong long metcons did. It trained her body to keep intensity longer without fatiguing or needing to stop for breaks.
"Is there a program/cycle much like the one you designed for Jocelyn that you suggest? I do CF but do not agree with much of the programming hq and other affiliates. I love the way that week designed above looked and was hoping to be pointed in a similar direction, as I do still want to compete in cf. Any help??"
This programming takes a lot if individualization and unfortunately we do not have a cycle that is general enough that anyone could use it. I could (but I won't) post Jocelyns whole 32 week cycle, or Jolie's or Tamara Holmes, cycles (which are all totally different), or any of my other clients. However, it wouldn't be something that just anyone could do. It was designed for their strengths and weaknesses, while providing them with enough variety, uncomfortableness, and "unknowable's", to prepare them for 3 days of "unknown" and sheer madness. In doing so I would be doing you, or anyone else reading this, a disservice. Jolie's program may not be as effective for you as it was for her. Jocelyn's program may not be good for you. The end results may not be the same. I individualized these programs for them, and often made changes week-to-week based on what was going on in their lives, or how great/shitty they were feeling. I didn't use a general approach that could be used across many different individuals (note: general programs can obviously be very effective for clients or athletes at many different fitness levels, as proven by our Catalyst workout of the days, or our gym programming, however I did not design these programs for that purpose). This is why I do remote programming for people all over the world. We also design "general" strength and metcon programs for gyms to use with their classes. I hope this makes sense.
The catalyst workout of the day has several strength cycles that are amazing and have shown great, amazing results for hundreds of people around the world. It is not as heavily metcon influenced as the example week I have shown, but has conditioning incorporated. You can also choose a cycle that fits your needs here: http://www.cathletics.com/daily/about.php
Or, we do personalized programming, of course.