I would suggest the study concept be the opposite - to invalidate AGT. If the course is set to demonstrate it is ineffective, and yet it shows it is effective, this is a much more meaningful result than the latter. For instance, if the idea behind AGT is that it increases the density of mitochondria in a muscle fiber, then you can say it doesn't and assess pre/post for AGT Group - Control Group - HIIT Group - LISS Group. If the idea behind AGT is it improves VO2max, then say it doesn't an assess pre/post.At present, we have a broad thesis: to authenticate the supremacy of AGT
The goal should not be to prove you are right, but to prove you are wrong. We get better science that way, with less biased study design and less biased interpretation of the results.