It might even be argued that Lasker had allready given up before the match started. Lasker had offered Capablanca the title without playing a match.  
It was actually Capablanca who insisted on playing for the title.

As for Lasker not being of world champion calliber after the match, i dont agree. In 1924 he won the famous New York tournament, ahead of Capablanca and Aljechin and his level of play had certainly improved when compared with the WC match.
In 1925 he finished second in Moscow, half a point behind Bogoljubov, but before Capablanca.
It was unfortunately a falling out over the prize money and starting fees (compared with Capablanca), that caused him to refuse an invitation to the New York 1927 tournament. 

Saying that after his last title match Lasker was no longer champion material, when in 1924 and 1925 he tournament results were superior to Capablanca is a bit like saying that Kasparov was no longer championship material after losing his title to Kramnik. Even though his tournament results after the match were superior to Kramnik's.

He didnt play any tournaments between 1926 and 1934, but when he 
came back in 1934 he still was a formidable opponent.
In Moscow 1935 he finished third behind Botwinnik and Flohr,
but again ahead of Capablanca.
By 1936 Capablanca and Aljechin where  superior in strength and new stars like Botwinnik, Euwe, Fine and Keres had appeared. 
If you doubt his playing strength in 1936, replay his game
with Botwinnik from the Nottingham tournament. Here Lasker introduced the minority attack in conjunction with an early Bg5 in the Grunfeld.

When Kramnik beat Kasparov it was the only time since Capablanca-Lasker 1921 that someone had won a championship match without losing a single game.  Anand appears to be close to achieving this as well.

Does anyone think Vlad will not gain a single win?

Does anyone still think Kramnik can win this match?
Any bold supporters?

This raises the question what would have happened after 
32.bxa iso 32.b5...(see diag)

32....bxa 33.Rb1! still seems to give white something to play with.....
Perhaps a topic for the endgame section.......

Just saw that the remarkable chessdom site.
Thx Mupas for drawing my attention to it        
has the following remarkable variation:

32....bxa5 33.Rb1,Nc5 34.Bxc5,Rxc5 35.Rb5,Rc5
overlooking the simple 36.e4 and black does have problems.

CORRECTION

36.e4,Rd4 37.Rxa5,c3 and black escapes
so
36.Rb6 should be better.

Unless I am very much mistaken Kramnik just committed an uncharacteristic endgame mistake.
31...a5 ? 32.b5!,c3?! 33.Rc2 (33.Kd3 stronger)
What the hec is 31...a5 for. 

Well still a draw hopefully:
33....Kf7 played
My opinion:
34.Kd3,Nc5 35.Bxc5,Rxc5 36 Rxc3,Rxc3 and the black has a fortress in the pawn endgame.

Wow,
At last a correct prediction:
Draw agreed in the following position:

Oeps,

Chessdom missed 30...dxc 31.Rc1,Rc8 32.g4 
For correct public transmission see www.chessvibes.com

Both players deserve another loss, unless chessdom.com has got the moves wrong again. Didn't Kramnik just blunder a rook, and didn't Anand just miss it?

Well, that was a bizarre experience    Following the game on chessdom.com with Dimitrov's commentary, I saw this:

1. c4 c6 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 "3. Ne5 is the main alternative" -- Dimitrov

3... e6 4. 0-0 "More precise move order than 4. 0-0" -- Dimitrov

4... 0-0 5. Nd5 Nxd5 6. cxd5 Re8 7. Ne1 "Up to now the opponents follow the 1st game of the play-off of the above mentioned match." -- Dimitrov.

As you can imagine, I was thinking one big WTF? Then I refreshed and the correct moves came up. So tame by comparison....