Possiblity #1: Teach the child math systematically from Kindergarten. If the child is math-intuitive, motivated or gifted, he might start resenting math because the early years of arithmetics and "math facts" can be absolutely soul sucking, especially to gifted children. If the child is not intuitive, motivated or gifted, he might resent math even more and might start feeling like he "can't do math."
Possibility #2": Don't teach the child systematically from Kindergarten. If the child is math intuitive, motivated or gifted he'll be picking up math anyway, he has a chance to grow up loving math when he is ready to study it beyond arithmetics. Meanwhile, the child might have enjoyed other things and developed other passions without being burdened by "math facts" and mindless worksheets. If the child is not motivated, intuitive or gifted, he still has an opportunity to grow up without hating math and his confidence intact--which is one of the biggest precursors to being successful in math later on.
Obviously, in my opinion there's much to lose in teaching a child who is not intersted or not ready too early.
I do agree that there are risks involved in both approaches. Some are easier to digest than others, especially in our culture of achievement. Different people take different risks.
I actually think the danger of being bored and resentful when you are good at something is incredibly small, much less if you're good at something and have the freedom of homeschooling as well. People generally enjoy doing things they are good at. Sure, if your child could skip pages and pages of review because - got it, let's move on - then it would be idiotic to keep passing them pages in some uptight attempt to fill out every paper. But working with a systematic curriculum is not automatically boring or resentment-inducing to bright, intelligent children. It gives them exactly what they desire - knowledge.
Take a parallel - playing a musical instrument. One of my children loved instruments from a very early age. I gave this child many opportunities to explore music non-didactically. BUT! There are systematic things to learn in music as well. It's not ALL just diddling around and playing what sounds pleasing. People don't master musical instruments that way. So there were also years and years of didactic lessons and that included years and years and years of intentional, daily practice. Sometimes it was difficult. Sometimes the kid was sick of playing piano. But that's part of learning discipline - you keep going. The child plays beautifully now.
I have never heard of a master musician who did not learn the didactic part of music theory, who only just played what they could pick up and became a master at it. Never heard of an accomplished musician who just dabbled at an instrument once in a while when the mood struck. A musically intuitive person does not become bored and resentful when someone teaches them the staff and what all those circles mean and why it says "largo" or "allegro" at the top of the piece. All that info is just a key that unlocks greater mastery and thus, greater joy in the instrument.
See, I think this whole "gifted kid is bored with didactic teaching" is a myth
. Gifted children love to learn. They are hungry for knowledge and thrilled when they can obtain more of it in their area(s) of interest. What a gifted kid doesn't want to do is sit in a room with 20 other kids who are being taught something they already know. But homeschooling has the advantage of not having to be that way at all, but not because the solution is that they shouldn't be instructed on purpose at all
. Just that you don't dwell on 2+2 when they have already mastered that and are ready to explore 4-x=2.