Both were instrumental, but I'd actually lean towards Genovese. Lucky gets credited with alot, and deservedly so, but if you think about it, he wasn't on the street all that long. Commission was formed in the early 30s, and he was off to jail by the late 30's, then off to Italy. Obviously he held heavy influence, but Genovese was mostly here in the states, with his eyes on everything going on. He had a short stint in Italy as well, and held enough power to cozy up to Mussolini. I will say, I think that Genovese is to blame for Apalachin getting busted, but the guy saw and presided over the Genovese family when the mob ran everything. For my money, I'm taking Costello over both.
I think Vito was in Italy for more like 10 years, something like 1936-47 give or take. When he returned to the US my understanding is he was a captain under Costello.
Tough to compare the two as Luciano lived through the largest war where he orchestrated many of the killings and ultimate outcomes. I always have a bit of a slimy view of Genovese also as a major heroin dealer, attempted murder on Costello who is generally highly respected, likely involved in the murder of his second wife’s husband, guy just seems fucking nasty. But both were equally as ruthless in their ascent. But from general reading in what I hear about each guy I would go with Luciano as the more respectable and “better” leader. The alliances he was able to make and people he influenced is pretty impressive with all that was going on in the early 30s. And even in Italy I believe his influence was still of value, maybe less so after Costello stepped down.
