How good is the Backyard Professor?

Another criticism on the instructional level is the final position.

I don't care that BYP doesn't immediately know how to win that endgame. But since that's the case he should have not mentioned it. Just end there and say it was an instructional game for ____ reasons. Instead he says (guesses) neither the black bishop nor the black king will be able to stop the b pawn from queening.

This is incorrect. Either one of them could stop the pawn from queening. The winning idea is to use the b pawn as a decoy. This is a simple enough idea for a beginner to understand, and so ubiquitous to endgames that it would be useful to teach.

But instead of either being silent, or educating himself so he could teach it, he makes stuff up. So along with not explaining why black doesn't trade his bishop off, this would also frustrate any beginner who sets up the end position and tries to win by directly queening the b pawn.

Almost word for word my thoughts. The pawns on the kingside are the target. That's where White has a group of pawns that will be able to advance together.

Played to the very end, Black gets a very active bishop that will be forced to sacrifice itself for a kingside pawn (or the knight may eventually swap itself for the bishop).

Another criticism on the instructional level.

He says in the beginning (4:11) that in the game we're about to see, it's very instructive to watch how the players try to make the position better for their respective minor piece (knight or bishop).

However he never mentions this again. In fact later he emphasizes over and over that black is stuck with his bad bishop, and there's nothing he can do to make it better.

That's something he remembers reading in one or more of Silman's books, but as he does not understand it, he fails to see that this game offers a poor example of this struggle.

The bishop is not bad until 17...e6

Yeah, we completely agree about BYP

And I think, you know, there was that 1600 guy defending him.

Well the 1600 knows (probably) when BYP is full of crap, so it doesn't bother him. He just ignores the gibberish and moves on.

But you have to look at it through the eyes of a beginner. What is the beginner hearing and seeing? What kinds of questions will the beginner have, and are the things being taught useful?

These are questions a real educator habitually, (I would guess even instinctively) asks themselves.

And I know I'm preaching to the choir with @Ziryab here, but I also want to explain my reasoning for the record, for when someone stumbles upon this topic at some future date. I don't hate BYP mindlessly, I'm carefully explaining why he is not good for beginners.

Well said.

I also can say that he made one video that I thoroughly enjoyed. It concerned his second USCF tournament. He carried a camera around and made video of the TD, some of the players, skittles (he played the infamous "Octopus"--once Montana's top rated player), and the awards.

I know several of the people in that video. Even if I didn't, I would consider it a good glimpse of what small, local tournaments are like here in the rural American west.

When he's not trying to be something he is not--a teacher--Kerry Shirts can be charming.

He's never going to get to 1400 USCF himself.

Everyone who attempts to learn chess from him will accumulate misconceptions that they must unlearn in order to improve.

Please read the thread. We've dissected one of his recent videos in the past two days and listed some of the errors.

Perhaps the root of BYP's failures as a player and teacher stem from a lack of objectivity about his own play and hos own inability to read and study critically. 

I'm curious, did you start choking while laughing. That "haah" near the end sounds like a breathing problem. I was worried about you.

Maybe a zen-type exercise like target shooting or archery could help with your breathing. Even bowling might help if the place is not overrun with tobacco smoke like American bowling alleys were in the past.

My eye sees such things instantly (unless it's my own writing). Didn't have to check.

In this other one, my eyes are drawn to the few sequences hahaha... because these are pronounceable words.

I'm glad you're not choking.

You think you're gonna "own" someone who was concerned you might be choking from laughter? I was concerned for your safety. Now, I think you need mental help. That hostility is a sign of serious unresolved issues.

It could make it more dangerous to laugh.

And this thread is hilarious. Yesterday, someone joined just to praise Kerry Shirts (aka the notorious BYP) and was banned before dawn. Today, there are two more who joined and showed up here minutes later.

 I must repeat..  The BYP is not for everyone.  He appeals to beginners because he speaks and thinks beginner.  His greatest strength is that he motivates beginners to return to chess.  To my mind, he pointed out the most thing i n this position: the dark-squared bind.  He does not explain technique because he is not aware of it..  What he does do is encourage chess study. Talk to any beginner and most will say,"That's what I was thinking."  As I said before, those who do not like BYP should study Chess Informant.  They will find the highest level of improvement. there.  By the way, attacking him, 1600's, and other beginners does nothing to help.  No one can say how far the beginners you mentioned go.  

B6 the eay Zirab, still looking for that book.I can see it in my mind's eye but can't find it. Frustrating.

I'm not attacking BYP, you, or anyone. I'm detailing specific instances that are bad for beginners in that particular video.

Yes, there are some golden nuggets... pretty much every time he reads the comments of the author / player it's a good comment, but as I explained in detail, there are many more instances of him misinforming, confusing, and potentially frustrating a beginner.

And you seem to be under the impression that advanced players can't teach simple concepts. That's simply untrue.

Mariner, they can. But students understand better if an instructor is within 200 points.  Above that, masters assume beginners know and understand more than they do. My comment was not directed at you but at the poster who was putting down Shirts, beginners, and a 1600.

Among instructors who are completely talentless and untrained in pedagogy that may be true.

But a GM can teach the basics well if they're a good teacher, the same way a math professor can teach algebra.

Very often math professors lose their students because what is obvious to him is foggy at best.  Then the math professor sends the student to a tutor.  A gm would get frustrated teaching a beginner and could not understand why a beginner could not calculate a simple variation.  I saw Kasparov explain a line to beginners.  It was simple endgame counting.  They had no idea how he reached the final position.  On the other hand, a 2000 teaching an 1800 would really understand the problems of the 1800.

Lol, I'm sure Kasparov would be a horrible teacher. Even Naka and Carlsen dumped him really quickly.

I posted example videos of GMs teaching extreme basics in a friendly and accessible way.

Like I said before, rating doesn't make a good teacher, because teaching itself is a skill.

You seem to think that just because someone is rated near someone else that automatically means they're a good teacher.

Not at all.  But even people who attempt to teach chess make good teachers if they encourage students to learn more.  What I am saying is that someone who made master understands better the problems an expert faces to make it to master or 1800 to a 1600.

What if they encourage you to acquire what in reality are misconceptions?