I'm sick of this "100 s in winning tests" thing because its grossly misleading if you look only at the surface of it.
Factors like others' contribution, quality of opp attack, the pitch etc have to be taken in mind. Also, if a player makes a 100 against a good attack and against great odds (none of the others contributing) with the team still not winning, does it make it a lesser effort? Also, even a great 100 is rendered ineffective because your bowlrs can't bowl out the opposition! SRT's been in this situation many a time, which is a fact conveniently ignored by his critics.
One more stupid way of assessing the value of a 100 is by rating it higher blindly if it comes in the 2nd innings, as though teams bowl underarm in the first innings. This fad, i suspect has been started by the "knowledgable" Indian media houses like TOI, NDTV etc....