The opinion you hold is no different to those who I witnessed.
I have nothing more to add.
The GLARING differences:
1) You have been asked to directly name this person and you seem to feel no obligation whatsoever to provide a name of this allegedly, high level swordsman.
2) You have been given an opportunity to demonstrate your "opinion" is an empirical manner (as opposed to things that you have alleged to have witnessed).
You can continue to offer opinions and people will continue to ask for some type of demonstrable, empirical evidence of stated opinions. When you can provide such experiences (such as your meeting with Mark Freeman), people can begin to realistically assess your stated opinions and alleged skills. In absence of that, you continue to proverbially shoot yourself in the foot by avoiding, skirting and denying any necessity for the empirical validations of ideas and skills. This process serves as a genuine foundation for all martial arts. This is particularly the case when people with a greater knowledge base of facts and abilities have presented you with information that runs counter to your stated opinions and alleged abilities.
In other words, if you have nothing more to add to this, then I will continue assert that your position is dangerous and irresponsible when you are acting in a role as a teacher. If you would like to take me up on my offer to put such stated opinions and alleged abilities to the test, please let me know.