I'm still not sure what the point of the argument is. Two people can be on the same level, and one of them be, in general "technically better" in their stroke mechanics, but the other one can have other strengths, such as speed, footwork, shot selection, etc, which allow their overall game effectiveness to be similar to the first player. Either player can win because their overall effectiveness on the tennis court is similar. Is this the whole argument? Seems like it to me. If so, well, yeah, no sh** sherlock.