When I was just 6 years old my father signed me up for a track program a few towns over. Practice was 4 times a week and meets almost every sunday. I was doing 1200m repeats and racing 1500s by the age of 8. By age 9 I was running in the USATF nationals for my agegroup. I ran a 5:30 1500 at age nine to place 14th in the nation. I continued training and running well through middleschool and highschool but never was "good". I was a pretty subpar highschool runner. My best mile only 4:40 and best 5k only 16:15. I always had horrible knee problems in highschool and seemed to be alot smaller/shorter/younger looking than all other kids my age. I looked about 3-4 years younger than I actually was.
Enough with the background. My question is... how early did you start running? And do you think that starting this early has negative affects? Do you think you have more of a chance to reach your full potential if you only start hard training in highschool? I for one feel that I would have been a much better highschool runner if I started at age 14 or 15 instead of 6. I would have grown alot more, been stronger, and would have stayed away from knee problems. Anyway, I took a full year and a half off from running (the longest ive gone since age 6) and now want to get back into it. Since I stopped, I have grown alot. It seems like I aged a good 4 years since I stopped and have caught up with everyone else my age. I am 21 and actually look 21. Hopefully this means my body has grown as well and now I can run to my full potential. What do you think?