Let’s say someone is very poorly conditioned to 10 rep sets and so their 10 rep RPEs are very disproportionate to their 5 rep RPEs and their true 1 RMs.
I realize this should be a temporary problem as their conditioning improves, but nonetheless I’m curious. If strength beneficial adaptations are thought to require a certain volume at intensities of 70%+ of 1RM, and the unconditioned trainee is doing work sets of 10 reps at say 60% of his true 1 RM, does this mean he will likely not get a strength benefit from these sets until his conditioning allows him to get the intensity higher?
Probably this is obvious but I don’t know what the physiology is behind how poor conditioning limits performance.
This isn’t really true, even if we’re talking about 1RM.
So, to answer your question, not necessarily- though I wouldn’t being doing the majority of their work as sets of 10 if I was trying to improve their 1RM above everything else.
I think you have said that hypertrophy requires some threshold of motor unit recruitment. If someone is too limited by their endurance conditioning does that suggest that they will be less likely to pass that threshold?
There is a point where having low work capacity and aerobic fitness will compromise the ability to train, sure. This is one of the reasons we recommend doing conditioning in all of our programs.