True, but the vast majority of the players were all amateurs at that time, including Laver, and other all time greats. If not, he wouldn't have been able to participate. They all had the same status. Most of the players he beat for his second Grand Slam were the same players he beat for his 1st one.
Being pro did not mean that you were necessarily better than all the other players. Seeing as Laver won his first Grand Slam as an amateur proves the point that most of the best players were still amateurs. It just meant that they were willing to play for money, but for that privilege, they accepted being banned from the Grand Slam tournaments. Laver lost 6 of his best years due to that ban. He won all 4 Slams, then turned pro and then got banned the following year. Once reinstated, 6 years later, he won all 4 again. As such he missed out on 24 Grand Slam tournaments in his absolute prime. Even if he'd won half of them, he'd be at 26 Grand Slam tournaments won. GOAT. The renowned tennis historian and broadcaster, Bud Collins, was in agreement. He passed in 2016 so he was still able to see Roger, Rafa and Novak when making that assessment.
It was a few brave players who took that risk and paved the way for the current status. I remember seeing a pic of them all and there were only about a dozen or so. Off the top of my head, aside from Laver, there was Pierre Barthes (French), Roger Taylor (Brit) and Pancho Gonzales (Mexico) and possibly Roy Emerson (Ozzie). I saw Pancho play a Canadian Open match at the Cricket Club on Wilson Ave. Boy, he had a temper. He lost a point and got so mad that he took a ball and smashed it over the main clubhouse and it must have landed right onto Wilson.
p.s. No Wikipedia required when composing this post.