|
|
Post by henry25 on Sept 1, 2009 0:53:24 GMT -5
Wrong on some of those. And contrary, do you poor milk? cfmalone, you should probably do some research into who you are criticizing. It might give you a bit more respect to what Bruce is saying. Is this THE Bruce Deacon!? never mind, my question has been answered. Great insight from these guys, i love the advice especially being a high school athlete  |
|
cda
Full Member
Posts: 267
|
Post by cda on Sept 1, 2009 7:33:30 GMT -5
cfmalone, you should probably do some research into who you are criticizing. It might give you a bit more respect to what Bruce is saying. Is this THE Bruce Deacon!? never mind, my question has been answered. Great insight from these guys, i love the advice especially being a high school athlete You're a high school athlete? That really turns my world upside down. As a Senior Member, I've always viewed your profound insights and hilarious witticisms as the product of years of experience. I pictured you in your mid-40's, still running a brisk 10k, possibly with some kind of linguistics degree and little round glasses. |
|
skuja
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by skuja on Sept 1, 2009 9:38:34 GMT -5
Oh dear, you got him confused with me then.
|
|
|
|
Post by tundra on Sept 1, 2009 10:48:34 GMT -5
I love(insert dripping sarcasm here) when a thread gets hi-jacked by idiots. A potentially learned thread starts and then *poof* the trolls appear. I thought this thread might be able to morph into something that I really enjoy reading on Letsrun. It's the Master's thread where a group of athletes from across the country share some insight on their week or training or racing. If you are a Master's athlete and enjoy some comaraderie, swing over to letsrun and jump on the Master's Weekend thread. Some high level Master's athlete's share over there the way the Kevin has been so kind to do here in the past. It's been a great way for me to learn and adapt my schedule and do some sharing from time-to-time. I hope this thread hasn't chased Bruce away. Sorry......rant done!
|
|
|
|
Post by bdeacon on Sept 1, 2009 11:29:29 GMT -5
Nice post, Christie. And you're right, the term "burnout" is not particularly useful in itself. In fact, it may be more trouble than it's worth. The problem is that, for a few years now, our age-class middle distance people have been as good as ever (better, in fact, at ages 14-16); but, this hasn't been translating into greater depth at the senior elite levels, particularly in the distance events--in fact, quite the opposite. Attributing this to something called "burn-out" isn't very helpful. In my view, the paradox in question must have something to do with our model of youth development, which has over the years come to ape sports like hockey, swimming and gymnastics much more than it did 30 years ago. Someone like Bruce was basically a young maverick, out there on his own, doing his own thing for his own reasons. By contrast, a kid who is training and racing a lot today was very likely introduced to the sport by an adult, and is doing his/her thing in the context of a very organized program, with tons of parental/adult scrutiny and supervision, with all of the attendant external pressures. Kids like Bruce (if there are really any left) are not the issue. They are likely to stick with it for the same reasons that brought them to the sport in the first place. It's the kids who join a serious club at an early age and who start training and racing year-round in that context that, I think, are the ones at issue when it comes to premature abandonment of the sport. What say you, Brucie? I don't believe that this is entirely true for myself. I started running at a summer camp, ran two marathons at 12 (VERY low mileage training), and then was counselled out of running marathons by Bill Rogers. I then joined a track club (Ottawa Lions) and was coached by John Fitzgerald. He had me on a year long program where I raced all four seasons and did periodic bouts of decent mileage (70-80 mpw). It was a good program and I think that it served me well physically. I guess I have the benefit of looking back on all of the runners that beat me (many) in high school and seeing those who went by the wayside and those who actually performed well as seniors. These are my observations: 1) To make it to the international level, you have to enjoy running. If you just like racing, then it will be a challenge to continue past university. 2) You have to invest in running mileage and building a base. My contemporaries that succeeded beyond high school were guys like Oleson, Halvorsen, Dave Reid, John Castellano. These guys weren't scared on a decent long run or hitting higher mileage totals. I wasn't alone in coming from a marathon background. Look at Carey Nelson. 3) While not being a Lydiard disciple, there seems to be a pattern between those who follow some of his principals and those who succeed in the long run. 4) Those who last, manage their injuries well. I wasn't injured as a youth (ever), but I have noticed in my later years that injury management leads to longevity. 5) When you stop having fun running, you will start to lose interest. Many of those who I watched quit let the stress of competing rob the joy of the sport from them. In the end, if it isn't any fun, then do something else. No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to compete. 6) I don't know many high school athletes that quit the sport because of injury. It was because it no longer meant as much to them in relation to school, girl friends, work or other interests. 7) Not to knock cross training (it has its place), but if you want to be a good runner...run...lots...often. 8) Athletes that worked hard on their easy days got injured or just never reached their potential. Go hard on the hard days and take the easy days easy. In retrospect, I think that there were some great races that I blew because I was so fit that I couldn't slow down my easy days...learn from my failures. I don't post here a lot, but I will leave the younger guys with another few tips... -work on your speed...even at the marathon it is a key limiting factor -run sand hills...they build power -don't over stretch...it will get you injured -never lose hope...I didn't make my first national team until I was 24 years old...things take time -find a good group of runners to train with... -it is alright to race frequently, but you can't expect to run your very best every time out...learn to play with some lesser races and experiment with different tactics. Hope this helps someone... Cheers, Bruce PS I continue to struggle with some Achilles problems. I haven't gone under the knife yet, but it is a real possibility in the next few months. I continue to cross train in the hopes of returning. |
|
|
|
Post by knights on Sept 1, 2009 11:41:24 GMT -5
I'm glad that my blog could provide such great insight, however indirectly it may have been.
|
|
|
|
Post by henry25 on Sept 1, 2009 12:04:25 GMT -5
Is this THE Bruce Deacon!? never mind, my question has been answered. Great insight from these guys, i love the advice especially being a high school athlete You're a high school athlete? That really turns my world upside down. As a Senior Member, I've always viewed your profound insights and hilarious witticisms as the product of years of experience. I pictured you in your mid-40's, still running a brisk 10k, possibly with some kind of linguistics degree and little round glasses. LOL Skuja.. thanks for the support 1000 ...  (here's my little round glasses for you) well i guess the picture could throw you off, but thats what i get for having 300+posts AND having a picture of the great Jerome Drayton  But who's to say i don't have a linguistics degree? maybe i am 40, you'll never know .. P.S whether you're trollin' or not, i still got a good laugh .. |
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Sept 1, 2009 12:05:56 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing, Bruce. But, at the risk of putting you on trial here, a couple of things:
1. There were no where near as many serious racing opportunities for precocious early and pre-teens back 30 years ago as there are now. These days, the kids aren't just jumping into the odd all-comers or "league" meets like we used to. If they want to, and their coaches let them, they can be racing provincially, nationally, and even internationally by the age of 11! You even see kids running extra races, including road races, during the already very busy high school season. I don't recall much, if any, of that sort of thing when we were coming up. If you tell kids these days "not to worry about racing a lot", some of them will try to race once or twice a week, year round.
2. Perhaps you're seeing your own early years through rose coloured glasses. Your early experiences with high volume and frequent racing (by the standards of the day), may have have something to do with why you didn't make a national team till age 24, in spite of your talent. To be honest, you did struggle quite a bit in late high school and throughout university. A person of only average determination would not have lasted through this. Do we really want to be requiring above average determination of our kids simply to get them into their 20s, or do we want a model that maximizes their chances of getting into the senior ranks in one piece psychologically?
3. Of the many talented guys that ran with you in the Lions back them (a club that came closest to the current model of youth club in terms of racing and training), a very small percentage did anything at all beyond the age class ranks, and of those that did, most underperformed based on their early promise, due to injury and whatnot. As Andrew Lenton's little M.A. study clearly showed, most Canadian elite distance people were relatively late starters and non-specialists till their mid-teens. Guys like you and Carey had fantastic careers, but you remain outliers in having started the way you did.
|
|
skuja
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by skuja on Sept 1, 2009 12:18:32 GMT -5
You're a high school athlete? That really turns my world upside down. As a Senior Member, I've always viewed your profound insights and hilarious witticisms as the product of years of experience. I pictured you in your mid-40's, still running a brisk 10k, possibly with some kind of linguistics degree and little round glasses. LOL Skuja.. thanks for the support 1000 (here's my little round glasses for you) well i guess the picture could throw you off, but thats what i get for having 300+posts AND having a picture of the great Jerome Drayton But who's to say i don't have a linguistics degree? maybe i am 40, you'll never know .. P.S. thanks for trollin on what was an interesting and now only somewhat informative thread cda wrote that. Thanks Bruce. Great thread. (Some people should lighten up.) |
|
|
|
Post by henry25 on Sept 1, 2009 12:36:04 GMT -5
LOL Skuja.. thanks for the support 1000 (here's my little round glasses for you) well i guess the picture could throw you off, but thats what i get for having 300+posts AND having a picture of the great Jerome Drayton But who's to say i don't have a linguistics degree? maybe i am 40, you'll never know .. P.S. thanks for trollin on what was an interesting and now only somewhat informative thread cda wrote that. Thanks Bruce. Great thread. (Some people should lighten up.) lol i know, just didnt wanna quote 3 people |
|
|
|
Post by LANNY !!!!!!1 on Sept 1, 2009 13:09:17 GMT -5
LOL Skuja.. thanks for the support 1000 ... henry25 you don't post enough I love reading your comments. Yeah, clearly a big fan. |
|
|
|
Post by bdeacon on Sept 1, 2009 13:40:42 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing, Bruce. But, at the risk of putting you on trial here, a couple of things: 1. There were no where near as many serious racing opportunities for precocious early and pre-teens back 30 years ago as there are now. These days, the kids aren't just jumping into the odd all-comers or "league" meets like we used to. If they want to, and their coaches let them, they can be racing provincially, nationally, and even internationally by the age of 11! You even see kids running extra races, including road races, during the already very busy high school season. I don't recall much, if any, of that sort of thing when we were coming up. If you tell kids these days "not to worry about racing a lot", some of them will try to race once or twice a week, year round. 2. Perhaps you're seeing your own early years through rose coloured glasses. Your early experiences with high volume and frequent racing (by the standards of the day), may have have something to do with why you didn't make a national team till age 24, in spite of your talent. To be honest, you did struggle quite a bit in late high school and throughout university. A person of only average determination would not have lasted through this. Do we really want to be requiring above average determination of our kids simply to get them into their 20s, or do we want a model that maximizes their chances of getting into the senior ranks in one piece psychologically? 3. Of the many talented guys that ran with you in the Lions back them (a club that came closest to the current model of youth club in terms of racing and training), a very small percentage did anything at all beyond the age class ranks, and of those that did, most underperformed based on their early promise, due to injury and whatnot. As Andrew Lenton's little M.A. study clearly showed, most Canadian elite distance people were relatively late starters and non-specialists till their mid-teens. Guys like you and Carey had fantastic careers, but you remain outliers in having started the way you did. I can't remember exactly how many races I ran in HS, but it was 40-50/year. Perhaps this affected my final high school years, but I think that I struggled during those years largely because of a coaching change and the reasons behind my decision to change coaches. I do feel that racing has a role in HS that is different than in later years. In HS you are learning how to compete, and this comes with practice. Also, you are running for your club and your school. When I was in my international years, I would race 8-15 times a year. I don't agree with your notion that we should have a system that doesn't require high levels of determination. I have met many African runners over my career and determination is one of the things that sets them apart. In fact, when I look at those who are good, they are all super determined. It is a character pre-requisite and no system or model will replace it. This is distance running...it is all about character. If you don't want to hurt or don't have the passion to persevere, then choose another endeavour. This is a sport for the dogged, tough and determined. You're wasting your time trying to find a way around that. In terms of those in our training group, I would agree that they were exceptionally successful in high school and few made the transition. I don't however feel that this was a reflection of the training per se. I do believe it was a reflection of the training environment and the lack of opportunities in post secondary. I will give you an example that you will appreciate. Marc Oleson trained on the other side of town with a different coach. He trained as hard (more endurance base from my recollection), yet he made a better transition to post secondary than most of our guys. I believe that this had much to do with the training environment created by the coach. Cheers, Bruce |
|
|
|
Post by henry25 on Sept 1, 2009 13:41:16 GMT -5
wouldnt running sand hills end up causing some kind of ankle injury? All things i've heard about running in sand/on beaches have been negative
|
|
dr1500
Full Member
RADiculous
Posts: 279
|
Post by dr1500 on Sept 1, 2009 14:00:55 GMT -5
|
|
pmac
Junior Member
Posts: 122
|
Post by pmac on Sept 1, 2009 14:03:01 GMT -5
wouldnt running sand hills end up causing some kind of ankle injury? All things i've heard about running in sand/on beaches have been negative I suspect Herb Elliot would respectively disagree with you on that one, as would I. Don't knock it until you try it. |
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Sept 1, 2009 14:10:42 GMT -5
Bruce, my point about determination is that we shouldn't be employing development models that we know will make it harder than it already is to become a good senior distance runner. For instance, clearly, we wouldn't want a model that we know leads to frequent injuries, just because over coming injuries requires great determination. Even with the best model, great determination is required to go anywhere in this sport. Don't we want a development model that requires the least SURPLUS determination to get anywhere? If we don't, then we can expect to have fewer and fewer good senior level runners, which probably also means senior level runners who are not as good as they might be if they had more company at the top. Granted, the ones we'd have would be super-determined, just slower than they might otherwise be!
As for Marc, he made the transition to collegiate and post-collegiate, but we can hardly call his senior career a success. He was a high school sub- 4 mins runner who retired with roughly the same 1500 P.B. as when he was a junior, a 5k P.B. of only 13:38, and no 10k P.B. to speak of at all. One might reasonably say that, with a more gradual program, while he may not have run a high school sub-4, he might have been a much more successful senior athlete. I think he would have.
One other thing: I'm actually in favour of higher than average mileage for runners 16 and up. I actually find myself frequently caught between people who think it's fine for 12 year olds to specialize and run 60k a week, and high school coaches who think 100k a week is crazy for a 17 year old boy! It's a fine line, but one that's possible, and necessary, to negotiate. I am, however, dead set against tons of high level racing for young athletes.
|
|
|
|
Post by bdeacon on Sept 1, 2009 14:54:07 GMT -5
As for Marc, he made the transition to collegiate and post-collegiate, but we can hardly call his senior career a success. He was a high school sub- 4 mins runner who retired with roughly the same 1500 P.B. as when he was a junior, a 5k P.B. of only 13:38, and no 10k P.B. to speak of at all. One might reasonably say that, with a more gradual program, while he may not have run a high school sub-4, he might have been a much more successful senior athlete. I think he would have. One other thing: I'm actually in favour of higher than average mileage for runners 16 and up. I actually find myself frequently caught between people who think it's fine for 12 year olds to specialize and run 60k a week, and high school coaches who think 100k a week is crazy for a 17 year old boy! It's a fine line, but one that's possible, and necessary, to negotiate. I am, however, dead set against tons of high level racing for young athletes. Marc's career seems to have slowed more because of his training post secondary than his training in HS. He went from a coach (Bill Arnold) who had an endurance based program to Stanford which was more speed based. I would argue that this was not a successful running decision. I struggle to find male runners who benefited from the coach's program. Marc was not alone. My views regarding mileage and development are not conventional. I believe in the studies that indicate that there is a window of time from 12-15 (male) where great advances in endurance can be made. If I was coaching my son, I would encourage more endurance activity (running on soft surfaces, pool running, biking, long hikes on mountainous trails, etc.) during this time. I would have him race longer distances such as 3k-5k. I would then focus on shorter and more anaerobic races from 15-17. This would include a sizeable time during the year (November-March) where the focus would be on building an endurance base, circuits, hills. Seems that this is similar to Coe's approach. Of course, what do I know...I'm not even a level 1 coach. In general, I think that we emphasize anaerobic efforts when the young athlete's body is better suited to aerobic training. BTW...perhaps I am not hip to the ways of these types of discussions, but it sure is nice to speak to someone with a name and not a pseudonym. I would love to know with whom I am corresponding...Oldster? Cheers, Bruce |
|
skuja
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by skuja on Sept 1, 2009 14:57:19 GMT -5
Bruce hahaha.....yer gonna love this.......
|
|
|
|
Post by pq on Sept 1, 2009 15:17:34 GMT -5
I would love to know with whom I am corresponding...Oldster? I can help a brother out... Steve Boyd Yer welcome! |
|
|
|
Post by powerboy on Sept 1, 2009 15:18:19 GMT -5
Great discussion. I particularly agree with the notion that few kids physically burn out-it is much more emotional and related to sociological changes. We all start out aspiring to be Olympic champ, but by about age 17-18 it is apparent that that is not going to be. That is enough to discourage a large group of age class champs, while the more serious/motivated of us continue on, still aiming at world or national class, or simply to be the best we can be. As Deacon says, you had better like running.
I agree with Oldster that too much serious racing at age 12 is ridiculous. It is those kids that once they get to high school and see some talented opposition that are the likely ones to quit.
I also agree with the apparent contradiction that by grade 11 and 12 one can train pretty hard-perhaps as much as 80-100k if one is motivated and well coached. Its funny to remember that 100k is only 60 miles, and in the old days we certainly considered 50 miles as low mileage.
Here is a final thought/observation about how hard training can work; There are currently 3 world class US runners who were hs phenoms-Webb, Hall and Ritz. What they have in common is that they were all known as incredibly hard trainers in hs-in Ritz and Webbs' case tempo running virtually everyday.It is hard to imagine that they could be better than they are now had they chosen a lower training approach
|
|
|
|
Post by henry25 on Sept 1, 2009 16:15:17 GMT -5
I like this idea, and to pmac i've just heard negative things, doesn't mean i wouldn't keep an open mind to the benefits of sand running. I think i'm gonna give this a shot and try doing this once or twice for 5-10 minutes at a time for some strengthening! |
|
|
|
Post by bdeacon on Sept 1, 2009 16:28:01 GMT -5
I would love to know with whom I am corresponding...Oldster? I can help a brother out... Steve Boyd Yer welcome! LOL!! Thanks Ron. I should have figured that such intelligent insights would come from the esteemed Mr. Boyd. That and few people still call me Brucie. |
|
|
|
Post by coachj on Sept 1, 2009 16:48:50 GMT -5
- Not having any affiliations allow open and honest discussions -
Thanks Bruce , MANY others agree with your views -
|
|
|
|
Post by cfmalone on Sept 1, 2009 17:13:12 GMT -5
I agree fully with bruce this time. I NEVER strech before a race, ive never done in my entire long life and ive pulled something only 3 or 4 times
|
|
|
|
Post by cfmalone on Sept 1, 2009 17:18:12 GMT -5
and not in races, workouts only, by doing some freakish twist while stepping in a hole or something
|
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Sept 1, 2009 18:47:59 GMT -5
I can help a brother out... Steve Boyd Yer welcome! LOL!! Thanks Ron. I should have figured that such intelligent insights would come from the esteemed Mr. Boyd. That and few people still call me Brucie. I really thought the "Brucie" would have tipped you off immediately. As old as we both might get, you'll always be "Brucie" to me! Anyway, we've had principled disagreement about this for years. I can except that there is quite possibly some long term physiological benefit to having young kids do aerobic activities (although I'd like to see some hard evidence of this, if you have it); but, running is not all physiology. Serious run training is not playful like other sports; it is tedious drill for most kids, and bound to turn many of them off running completely if introduced at an early age. And, if you can get them to do it, they tend to run way ahead of the development curve, only to be caught by their later-starting peers in their early teens, which can cause them to think they're not as good as they thought they were, and move on to something else. On the other hand, give the same kids time to become fully psycho-socially mature and it's a different story. Chances are they will develop an entirely different and more sustainable relationship to running. And again, the problem is not with the odd kid who, entirely on his own initiative, happens to love going out running on his own for hours and hours. This kind of kid will be fine no matter what. The average sports-minded kid-- the one for whom any successful development program must be designed-- will need to be given time to acquire a taste for the unique demands of this sport. Lots of very successful runners-- myself and virtually everyone else I know and/or have coached included-- did not automatically like running for the sake of running as young kids. And, if we were introduced to it in the form of long, hard workouts and tedious long runs at age 12, would never have stuck with it. Thankfully, we got lucky and didn't encounter someone who told us this was necessary to be any good, and we ignored that fact that the few kids who were training like that were kicking our asses. And, coachj, what the hell are you on about, you old Zen master!? P.S. Bruce, I also disagree about Marc. He continued running until age 29, meaning he was out of university, and with a different coach (Jeff Johnson, a very successful guy) for 7 years. We can hardly place all of the blame for what happened to him on his university coach. No matter what, his open career can hardly be considered a success when one considers how many people ran much faster than he did and who did not run 3:40 as 19 year olds. |
|
|
|
Post by Bomba on Sept 2, 2009 1:32:09 GMT -5
.....oldster...naaahhhh...I call him Brucie whenever i see him.......
....more relevant to this discussion would be my take that I agree with oldter about racing lots when young.....but also keeping them motivated is another issue (let's be honest the kids love to race and it can be what keeps them going, but racing 3 times a day is ridiculous).
.....and that nothing repalces a holistic training program. In other words it covers many bases and nothing too specific. I've altered my thinking here to go a little bit more in line with Bruce and that is to run more.....not faster, just more. But then again when I worked with Mazzotta in HS he ran 14:39 off 40miles per week, so my take on more might only be like 50-60 miles, but at the low end of workout volume egs as low as one can go for a vo2 max workout.
I've always felt that if you go too low (specifically for a gr 12 student) mileage then you leave too much of a jump for them if they happen to get in a higher volume school (egs the recent article on andrew wheating...no i don't have a RW subscription...i only read it at the supermarket if there's something good). My take has always been that u leave a HS student in the realm where they can go say 60-70 miles as a freshman (and it isn't a big jump) and then add 5 miles per yr so that by the time they graduate they can easily handle 80-90 miles and then if they need to jump up a bit more it's not a big deal.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Bomba on Sept 2, 2009 1:39:45 GMT -5
...sand hills never hurt herb...they just make him dry puke ;-) endlessly..... wouldnt running sand hills end up causing some kind of ankle injury? All things i've heard about running in sand/on beaches have been negative I suspect Herb Elliot would respectively disagree with you on that one, as would I. Don't knock it until you try it. |
|
|
|
Post by Linc on Sept 2, 2009 10:31:08 GMT -5
I've always felt that if you go too low (specifically for a gr 12 student) mileage then you leave too much of a jump for them if they happen to get in a higher volume school (egs the recent article on andrew wheating...no i don't have a RW subscription...i only read it at the supermarket if there's something good). My take has always been that u leave a HS student in the realm where they can go say 60-70 miles as a freshman (and it isn't a big jump) and then add 5 miles per yr so that by the time they graduate they can easily handle 80-90 miles and then if they need to jump up a bit more it's not a big deal..... Definitely agree with this. I think this is the biggest reason that a lot of people get injured freshman year, they aren't ready to handle the mileage jump. It happened to me... 60 miles a week is NOT too much for grade 12 athletes to be doing! |
|
|
|
Post by oldster on Sept 2, 2009 10:48:16 GMT -5
Bomba, you are hereby exposed as a closet RW reader! Any new snack recipes you'd like to recommend!?
Actually, I just wanted to express my agreement about the need for senior HS kids to become acquainted with higher volume running in order to be better prepared for college programs. The more time I spend around HS coaches, the more I realize the extent to which they see their role as that of helping kids win HS races at all costs-- i.e. at the expense of their longer term development (without necessarily even being aware that such a trade-off is being made).
There are many reasons young runners fail to thrive in college programs, chief among which, I think, is the inability to adapt quickly enough to the demands of the typical college program. Having only ever done the kind of low mileage/high intensity programs that produce mid-distance success in the age-class ranks, they often simply do not know how to adjust their easy run pace to the demands of a higher volume program. Or, they just find it psychologically overwhelming to be asked to run so far every day. And this, BTW, is a big part of the reason so many of our talented young mid-distance guys are failing-- or not even trying-- to make the transition to the 5 and 10k: they leave the sport before ever learning how to train the way "real"distance runners the world over actually train. When I was coming up in the sport, it was much more typical for senior HS students to run 100+ kms a week (although I think most of us raced far less than kids do today). Consequently, we had many more 17-19 year olds capable of running sub 30min 10ks (like probably 10-15 guys in my national cohort alone). This meant that many more of us were running very well at 10k to the Marathon by our mid-late 20s. These days, most young guys are either freaked out by the idea of running 100+ kms/week, or else worried they will "lose their speed" for their next big race, which is always right around the corner.
|
|
(here's my little round glasses for you) 
But who's to say i don't have a linguistics degree? maybe i am 40, you'll never know .. 
