I might add that Lasker was world champion for 27 years, much longer than
even Kasparov, but Lasker had generally an even lower level of domination
over his contemporaries than Kasparov, except for a 3 year peak period, see
below.

Yes but Lasker should have lost to Schlecter in a match that favored
him in every way imaginable. This was a match that was made to give
Lasker every advantage and he barely won which has severly tarnished
his greatness. When you look at all the statistics and look at every
angle Capablanca was probably the greatest player ever. His one
weakness was living the nightlife. He was a partyman.

EZoto