I think even Sachin would laugh if you suggested he was better than the Don. Some numbers:
Tendulkar - 41 Centuries in 254 Innings, including 3 against Zimbabwe and 2 against Bangladesh. Only 4 scores over 200, including one against Zimbabwe and another against Bangladesh. Overall average 54.68.
Bradman - 29 Centuries in 80 innings!!! 14 scores over 200, including two over 300. Average 99.94. Plus, he didn't play a test between 1939 and 1945. That means he played about a quarter of his test innings after he was 38.
So, if Bradman had played as many test knocks as Sachin, he'd have got about 85 centuries!!! And if he'd played those six years, he would ahve averaged over 100.
I'm not finished: In Bradman's day, they didn't cover the pitches when it rained, so some of his knocks were on 'sticky wickets'. Plus, his average in the Bodyline series (56.57) was higher than Sachin's overall average. Lastly, conditions now favour batsman to a graet degree: Short boundaries, protective equipmentfor batsmen better than most armies have, one bouncer an over and pathetic bowling line-ups like Bangladesh, the kiwis and the current west indies. God, Don would have scored 600 against Bangladesh. He might have bored himself out.
IT'S AN ABSOLUTE JOKE TO COMPARE SACHIN, GREAT AS HE IS, TO DON BRADMAN!!!
I think Lara's better than Sachin: For about 8 years of his career he had to come in at 2 for 20 regularly, hereas Tendulkar often came in after Dravid had alraedy worn the bowlers down.