Athletic performance
Meaningful increases in CMJ take-off velocity were observed for all training groups. The increase in take-off velocity, would also represent an increased jump height, although the smaller measurement error observed with take-off velocity means the increases observed are less likely to be an effect of random error. It should be noted however, that the control group had the largest increase in CMJ take-off velocity, although the magnitude of increases was similar between groups. The addition of sprinting or NHE had less of an effect on jumping than the control training programme, suggesting the benefits to performance came from the conventional resistance program including the RDL. Non-significant changes were observed within mean propulsion force for the sprint and control training groups; however, all three training groups had a small increase in mean propulsion force to a similar magnitude, with the sprint training group having the greatest magnitude of adaptation. However, on an individual basis within the NHE training group, all bar one individual, which was within SEM, had a positive and meaningful increase within mean propulsion force. Whereas for both the sprint and control the individual response was mixed. This indicates that the NHE potentially led to an increased force generating capacity during hip extension [The control group had non-meaningful (<SDD) increase in absolute and relative peak net force attained during the IMTP, with a trivial and non-significant increase for absolute peak net force and small, significant increase in relative peak net force. Both NHE and sprint intervention groups, had meaningful (>SDD), significant and small increases in both absolute and relative peak net force. The sprint training group had the largest positive increase in both absolute and relative peak net force, 34.71- and 35.73%, respectively. Followed by the NHE training group had large positive increases in both absolute and relative peak net force, 22.28- and 22.46%, respectively. The observed increases in the sprint training group could be the result of increased potential of increase motor unit activation, increase passive tension of the muscle-tendon complex and improved cross bridge mechanics [The NHE and sprint training groups had meaningful and significant decreases in 0–10 m, 0–20 m, and 10–20 m sprint times. Across all sprint times, the sprint training group achieved the greatest decreases in comparison to the NHE training group. Although the differences cannot be entirely attributed to the NHE or sprint training, due to the accompanying resistance training programme [