We have had a lot of discussions regarding Guga and Nadal, but what I wanted to know is whether Fed coudl have tackled Guga at his prime and could he have won the RG already if both these players had their primes at the same time?
Yes he could have won the RG by now; Fed's main problem today isn't that he is not good player on clay, he is in fact a great player on that surface, but the problem is his inability to handle Nadal's topspin forehands to his backhand side, and also considering Nadal's athletic abilities, it becomes really difficult for him to charge the net and end the points quickly. So I don't see how he could beat Nadal with his classic gamestyle.
Considering Guga was a righty, and not a topspin player with a one handed backhand himself, I think this match up between the two would even out a lot more. Although Guga was a great athlete, I don't think he could attack Fed's backhand as much as what Nadal does now. And if you go to the Federer forehand, you're almost dead most of the times. This will definitely not expose the Fed's weak wing (which is also a considerable weapon against most players, if the ball is quite low).
I dunno. Fed lost to Guga at RG even after Guga was a lesser player because of his hip injury. Guga also beat Fed on hardcourt following his hip surgery, and he never really was the same player after his hip surgery.
All of the what ifs can be played out pretty much however anyone wants to depending on their biases. My bias is Guga, of course.