The list is good, although some events remain debatable. The idea, to give half points in some cases seems fair to me. But as Cy Borg said, its not the whole picture. Overall numbers of events won, head-to-head results, match records, prize money won etc. should be included in a fair analysis.
On the old pro tour there wasn't the stabil structure, we have on today's ATP tour. The old pros never had the time, to focus on 4 preeminent major events, which were played in a certain nice schedule, distributed over the season. For instance, the Paris pro event was mostly played just one week before the Wembley event, which was seen by the pros as unofficial world champs. St. John had in another thread a list of Super Nine events or their equivalents. That list could give a good complementary view on many years.
Some small correction from first sight: In 1962 not Fraser, but Laver won Forest Hills.