According to Kasparov's book it was played Warsaw 1928, and White's name was actually I.Glinksburg. Kasparov claims to have been told this by Najdorf and/or Najdorf's daughter.

I thought that Kasparov had been personally given the information by Najdorf, but looking more closely at what he wrote, he may have simply read it in a book written by Najdorf's daughter, Liliana (sorry, can't tell you anything about the book).

In "Kings, Commoners and Knaves" Edward Winter notes that the game was first published in a Polish newspaper in August 1930 and speculates that it may have been played in a minor Warsaw tournament in January of that year.

<JG27Pyth: God. So true. I mean I hate that when I'm playing a nice game of chess and I think I'm just going to win a pawn or something, and wham bam, all of a sudden I've just stumbled into a multi-piece sacrifice ending with an elegant pawn mate... I mean how annoying is that!? When I was a lad I was impressed by such things too... but now that I'm 9 years old, I divide my time between running my 7 trillion Euro hedge fund and DNA sequencing my cat, by hand (I want to see if I can figure out how to make her sing the Neil Diamond catalog in Celtic...haha that's impossible, I'm really just trying to make her grow batwings). I certainly don't have time to be impressed by the odd random multi-piece 9 move mating combination sacrifice. OHHH crap... I just bent a spoon with my mind!!! Dammit that is sooo annoying.>

While Glucksburg is no softy, it looks Najdorf has seen the game all the way through, urm... in any case from ...9. Bxh2 onwards. Hereafter every bit is a part of a solid, well conceived plan. On move 13 Najdorf sheds the B to make place for his Q and it controls the 7th rank for keeps.

Move ...20. Bg4 pulls the K back into 'g' file and move ...21. Ne5+ leads to opening 'f' file to the R influence.

It was published in <Kurjer Warszawski>, 19 October 1930.

Scroll to the bottom to see a photograph of the article- which also lists <Najdorf's> opponent as <Glicksberg>:

This controversy is not settled- and it matters, since they were two different Polish chessplayers- and <Glicksberg> was much stronger.

This chessnote suggests that it was unlikely <Najdorf> mistook the spelling, and was indeed playing the weaker <Glucksberg>:

<6408. Najdorf brilliancy (C.N. 6388)

From Richard J. Hervert (Aberdeen, MD, USA):

‘Confusion still reigns regarding the Polish Immortal. The Kurjer Warszawski of 19 October 1930 (C.N. 6388) named the player of the white pieces as Gliksberg. However, Najdorf himself chose to correct only the date (commonly given as 1935, but corrected by Najdorf to 1930) in his commentary on the game on pages 62-63 of Najdorf: Life and Games by Tomasz Lissowski and Adrian Mikhalchishin (London, 2005). He left White’s name as Glücksberg.

The spelling Glücksberg is less likely to be an oversight by Najdorf because on pages 60-61 he also annotated a game which he had played against Gliksberg (at Łódź in 1929). At the start of that game Lissowski commented: “Numerous sources wrongly give the loser’s name here as Szapiro (or Shapiro, Schapiro). Gliksberg from Łódź should not be confused with the second-category Warsaw player Glücksberg.”

Is it possible that the Kurjer Warszawski erred in putting “Gliksberg”?’>