Editing Dutch Defence (section)

==History==
[[Elias Stein (chess player)|Elias Stein]] (1748&ndash;1812), an [[Alsace|Alsatian]] who settled in [[The Hague]], recommended the defence as the best reply to 1.d4 in his 1789 book ''Nouvel essai sur le Jeu des échecs, avec des réflexions militaires relatives à ce jeu''.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Stein |first1=Elias |title=Nouvel Essai sur le Jeu des Échecs: avec des Reflexions Militaires Relatives à ce Jeu |trans-title=New Essay on the Game of Chess, with Military Reflections Regarding This Game |date=1789 |publisher=(Self-published) |location=La Haye, France |pages=114–115 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=S8QCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA114 |language=fr}} The Dutch Defence is presented on p. 114:  ''"Dix-huitieme Partie.  Celui qui n'a pas la ''Trait'' ne veut pas recevoir le ''Gambit'' de la ''Dame''. 1. B. Le P. de la D. 2 pas.  N. Le P. du F. du R. 2 pas (a).  2. B. Le P. du F. de la D. 2 pas.  N. Le C. du R. à la 3me case de son F."''  (18th Game.  He who does not have the ''Treatise'' does not want to get the ''Queen's Gambit''.  1. White:  the Queen's pawn advances 2 squares; Black:  the King's bishop pawn advances 2 squares (a)  2. White:  the Queen's bishop pawn advances 2 squares; Black:  The King's knight advances to the third square, in front of his [i.e., the King's] bishop.)  From p. 115:  ''"(a)  On a déja vu que, quand on ne veut pas recevoir le ''Gambit'' du ''Roi'', on doit pousser, au second coup, le ''pion'' de la ''Dame'' deux pas.  De même vous devez observer que, lorsque votre adversaire commence par débuter au premier coup en poussant son ''pion'' de la ''Dame'', deux pas, vous ne pouvez mieux faire que de pousser le ''pion'' du ''Fou'' du ''Roi'' deux pas."''  ( (a)  One has already seen that when one does not want to get the ''King's Gambit'', one should push, on the second move, the ''Queen's pawn'' two squares.  Likewise, you should note that when your opponent begins on the first move by pushing his ''Queen's pawn'' two squares, you cannot do better than to push your ''King's bishop pawn'' two squares.)</ref>

[[Siegbert Tarrasch]] rejected the opening as {{chessgloss|unsound}} in his 1931 work ''[[The Game of Chess]]'', arguing that White should reply with the [[Staunton Gambit]], with White being better after 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 c6 5.f3{{chesspunc|!}} exf3.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Game of Chess |last=Tarrasch |first=Siegbert |author-link=Siegbert Tarrasch |year= 1987|orig-year= 1934 |publisher=Courier Dover Publications |isbn= 978-0-486-25447-0 |page=[https://archive.org/details/gamechess00tarr_550/page/n350 348] |url=https://archive.org/details/gamechess00tarr_550|url-access=limited }}</ref>