Originally Posted by veroniquem
Don't think so. Nadal beat Fed for the first time at 17, Djoko at 20, Murray too and Fed was the #1, the others nowhere near their prime. If they had been the same age, it would have been worse since Fed's level in 2000-2002 was considerably worse than his 2004-2007 level. He would have had to change his game to adapt and who knows if he could have?
I didn't say anything about Nadal. Nadal could and can hurt Federer at any age when he was at any age. Murray beat Federer once in his prime. Even Djokovic beat him once in his prime. On the other hand, Olderer took peak/prime Djokovic out at the French Open, Wimbledon, and almost did at the US Open too. Not to mention the bagel beat-down at Cincinnati. Prime Federer would comfortably deal with Djokovic (with a few losses, of course). He can still beat Murray (who is possibly hitting his peak) at 31. You can't see it because you're biased. Federer would actually benefit from being the same age as the other 3. He'd be racking up Calendar Year Grand Slams at the ages of 28, 29, 30, 31 or be coming pretty darned close to.