History of Chess with Emil Sutovsky | Episode 2 | Emanuel Lasker 

Kudos for your knowledge. But if you listen carefully, I said Rubinstein was the best tournament player of 1909-1912. Lasker played just too few events (without checking after 1909 where he shared with Rubinstein, he did not play a single tournament till 1914, did he?)

@@emilsutovsky474 first, many thanks for the video and for your amazing facebook page / chess history essays, etc. Indeed, I believe that Lasker played only in StP 1909 and 1914 at the time -- however, accounting for a different epoch, this should not disqualify him. When he showed up -- he was consistently fantastic. Regarding 1909-1912: I believe this is a too short period and it is a bit unfair to exclude 1914 -- after the war Rubinstein was not the same, yes, but he had all chances to shine in 1914 -- instead took 7th place. Also, his results at the time were just a tiny bit better than / comparable with Schlecter's. For some reason, there is more limelight regarding Lasker's longevity than about Lasker's peak: 1896-1900, in which he completely destroyed all main opponents in 4 major tournaments (1896, 1896/97, 1899, 1900) -- and the field in these tournaments was not bad at all! These five years alone is something that only Fisher, Kasparov, Carlsen and may be Karpov had ( Alekhine always excluded Capablanca at his peak, so I do not count him) --- and then Lasker arguably remained the number one player for 25 years after these peak five years!