Talk:Immortal Zugzwang Game

Shouldn't "Game" be capitalized?

The name of the article is "Immortal Zugzwang game". Since "Immortal Zugzwang game" is a nickname given to the Saemisch-Nimzowitsch game, shouldn't the g be capitalized, too -- i.e., "Immortal Zugzwang Game"? If so, does anyone know how to change the title? (Once in a similar sitution I tried creating a new article, then moving the contents of the old one over to there. I was soon told that that is emphatically not the right way to do it, since it messes up the history.) Krakatoa (talk) 02:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you do a formal "move" (i.e. use the "move" tab at the top) or just a copy and paste to the new title? Bubba73 (talk), 03:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I've never really noticed the "move" tab, let alone used it. Silly me. I just did a "copy and paste". Krakatoa (talk) 03:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

The move tab will do it, and the option "move talk page too" is checked by default, so leave it checked. Bubba73 (talk), 16:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Did it. Thanks! Krakatoa (talk) 22:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Immortal Zugzwang Game and Lasker

I deleted the claim that Lasker coined the term "Immortal Zugzwang Game". Edward Winter's 1997 article on Zugzwang (one of the references for the article) pretty well shows that that is not the case. According to Nimzo himself, the term originated in "Danish chess circles". See this from Winter's piece:

Eventually, Nimzowitsch went on a propaganda blitz. He burst into annotational song on pages 17-18 of the 2/1925 Wiener Schachzeitung under the heading ‘Zugzwang on a full board!’ Double exclamation marks accompanied Black’s 10th, 20th and 25th moves, and the high-spirited victor described 25...h6 as follows:

‘An exceptionally beautiful problem move! This puts White in nothing less than a tragic Zugzwang position (I won’t say tragicomic, since the sheer force of Black’s play rules out any thought of humour).

... In the opinion of the well-known Danish amateur master, the writer/editor Hemmer Hansen, this game would be worthy of being placed alongside the “Immortal Game”. While Anderssen was able to deploy the “sacrifice” as such to maximum benefit, I, Hansen said, achieved a similar effect with the Zugzwang. In Danish chess circles, this game is therefore described as the Immortal Zugzwang Game!’

Later that year, he continued in the same vein in his first book, Die Blockade (page 52), writing of 25...h6:

‘A brilliant move which announces the Zugzwang. ... This unusually brilliant Zugzwang mechanism makes this game, which Dr Lasker in a Dutch publication called a magnificent achievement, a counterpart to the “Immortal Game”. There the maximum effect of the “sacrifice”, here that of the “Zugzwang”.’

The Lasker article (in a Dutch newspaper?) has yet to be located.

In sum, (1) Nimzowitsch credited the "Immortal Zugzwang Game" sobriquet to "Danish chess circles"; (2) Nimzowitsch said that Lasker in an unnamed Dutch publication called the game "a magnificent achievement, a counterpart to the 'Immortal Game' " (Nimzo's paraphrase of what Lasker supposedly said); (3) the alleged Dutch publication has not been located. Krakatoa (talk) 21:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)