To be fair Tendulkar never achieved peak ICC rating points that Smith has. He has had the greatest peak of any batsman bar Bradman. That's hard to dispute. What that means for rating a batsman is a different matter.
Of course, and it's a valid criticism of Sachin's which has been accepted, as are (and it's somewhat linked), a lack of monster series where he has completely and utterly dominated the opposition.
Which is why, again, a World XI team can't just be made of players who are dominant monsters. It needs a mixture - Sachin and Lara/Ponting would have worked really well together, especially Ponting in particular as he was a #3 as long as the top 2 don't have them coming in a 5/2 each game. Give them at least a decent platform and they'd have absolutely dominated.
Sachin is Joe Root, except at an ATG level. Put a few monsters around him.
Listing averages by bowlers (and not just that, going further to only account for peak periods of the bowlers) and picking specific series and the rest is utter hogwash though. If batsmen are subject to such scrutiny, have players who almost walk into World ATG XIs been subject to the same scrunity? What is Warne's average when Sachin and Lara were playing in the same test at their very respective peaks?
The issue is that, apart from Bradman (although some try) and at the moment Smith, if you look hard enough, you will inevitable find some holes in someone's resume. Let's not start running away with these crazy holes though.
Sachin's holes generally tend to be less apparent because he was quite consistent throughout and for an extended period of time, in varying conditions, at varying ages, and in various countries, so the extent that one has to go to to find holes starts becoming really, really silly.