Just to point out the obvious, the so-called great Nadal has the advantage of being 5 years younger than his great rival.Just to point out the obvious, the so-called great Nadal beat Federer on the hardcourt at 17 yrs of age in 2004. Was Fed doing ok then? Yes, Nadal peaked a bit early in his career, unlike Federer. And Federer is the fittest of all-time for sure. Never suffered a significant injury. Never missed a Slam since he won his first. He's the quickest, most naturally gifted, and determined 30 year old I've seen, so I wouldn't complain about the age difference anyway. The way Nadal plays, he probably feels 30 himself. Nadal is just better head to head. Wouldn't matter if the two were the same age. And yes, Fed dominated the awesome players that are his age. You know, Roddick, Hewitt, etc...