Here is what I was getting at:
By using to 63-67 and then 68-70 the implied meaning is that Laver was the #1 player all those years. You add the word "arguably" to the 68-70 period, but I had to read very carefully to realize you were not actually saying that he was #1 in the world from 63-70.
After the incredible debates that have gone on about 64 and 70, those years will be accepted as FACTUAL number one years, all of them. Then a casual reader will add 63 and assume Laver was #1 for all those years.
That's why I don't like the word "arguably", because it is legalize for "I'm about to make a claim and state it as fact".
I don't think it is clear at all that Laver was #1 in 70, or in 64. He certainly was not in 63.
What I said and what I'm repeating here is that there are several posters here who are ready to seize upon any statement as "proof" that Laver was #1 for longer than I think is reasonable.
And I'm saying that you, if I have understood you correctly, are not saying that.