BRG/253 wrote:
I'm 29, quit at 24 and should have quit sooner. 20 is a perfect age to quit because at that point most people have gone as far in the sport as they're ever going to, but at least they can say they gave it a try. It's not worth it to continue much past 20 unless you're competing at an elite level and you're running for scholarship, money and glory. I know my opinion is in the minority, but I think you're doing everything right... you'll get a lot more enjoyment out of life by lifting weights and focusing on your social and sex lives than you will from running 90 miles a week to get from 15:00 to 14:45. You'll miss competing, but you'll like sex with young women better than you liked finishing in 150th place at college XC meets. My injuries were the best thing that ever happened to me because they forced me to move on with life. Most of the people here are 30+ and STILL stuck on running even though what they do counts for nothing.
I'm going to take the time to nominate this for the dumbest post of the year. If you didn't enjoy running, then it's a good thing you quit and if you enjoy your life more now, then more power to you. But to arbitrarily say things like "It's not worth it to continue much past 20..." is beyond dumb. This may shock you, but some people run because they actually like it. They really don't give a damn what it "counts for", which is a joke anyway. What, did God give you Universe Points for having sex with some random girl or lifting weights? Pretty much every activity is pointless when viewed on some grandiose scale.
To the OP, live the life you want to live. If you truly enjoy life more now than you did before, then great, keep doing what you're doing. You'll have to find out what is best for you. Maybe that's training hard again, maybe it's quitting running altogether, or maybe it's something between the two. Just don't listen to clowns that say you can't run and have a social life, date, make money, etc. because you definitely can.