Reading comprehension is one of your many failings apparently. I was not putting an exact order, just the groups, which would be obvious to anyone reading my post other than the incredibly stupid. or creation of a coherent message is one of your failings? The use of the word "probably" in front of Federer indicates what is his place in the order of the Top 5 you listed. Talk about failings and stupid lol
Also a Federer fan calling the field Sampras faced as the weakest ever, oh the irony, not to mention a poster like you speaking of sounding credible, haha. Yes, Sampras had a weak field. Never had to compete against a double-digit slam champion in his time. His main rival wasn't consistent as well. Even in the weak field from 96 - 02 Sampras was averaging 1 slam per year. Excuse me, I mentioned "credible" and "you" in one sentence. You have failed many predictions, because your overall reasoning is weak.
Borg is missing 2 slams, not just 1. There is a big difference. Sampras also didnt quit tennis in his mid 20s, but instead kept winning slams into his 30s (which Federer might not even do for the record).
Rosewall was banned from playing the slams for 12 years so his slam count is virtually meaningless, just like Roy Emerson winning as many as 12 is virtually meaningless to people today for the opposite reason. The fact he won 8 slams while being banned from 12 years of his prime is simply insane. Again something I shouldnt have to even explain but some special individuals apparently need to have everything explained to them.