Who is Your Favorite St. Louis Chess Club Lecturer and Why?

Guys - it seems there's some cryptic talk going on.  Care to share more openly with the rest of us?  Otherwise, you risk derailing a good thread discussion.  

If there's a problem with, say, a troll (just throwing out a hypothetical situation), then it would probably be best to go to the moderators rather than "hijack" an on-topic chess discussion thread.  Appreciate it guys!

(I'll sign off on this side discussion with this post and won't respond further in an effort to keep things on-topic.) 

I really liked the recent tourny St Louie held, the Sinquefield, it was fantastic. Maurice Ashley, I like him , Jen, she is sweet and beautiful so who wouldn't like that, and Yas is a great guy.

I wish they would have had coverage of events like this when I was growing up. I was aware of the Fischer Spassky championship, but it wasn't even televised back then, where I was any way.

When I was a liitle kid I loved chess. I didn't even know about clubs or books. I would get my pieces out and just start playing with them. For hours at a time sometimes. I would get all the pawns, and kings and play with just them, then I would sometimes add a knight or bishop with a few pawns and king. I would play white, then I would play black.

I learned all the pieces very well doing that, I could beat anyone I played against, friends and family. I beat my dad by 11, he wouldn't ever play me anymore, I think he was embarassed.

I never got to watch tournament play until I was in my early 20's.

I watched a few Friedman videos the past two days.

He speaks a bit too fast for me and is 100% serious (no humor at all), but comes across as a very dedicated, helpful, and nice lecturer!  I can see how he might appeal to some people's stylistic preferences, but I personally like a small amt. of humor and other pleasantries thrown in with hardcore analysis, lol.  That's why I still have Akobian at the top of my list.  He just gives you everything in his lectures!

Also, I find Akobian's analysis still better than Friedman's.  (If I have time I'll maybe come back and break down why...)  

But, I totally agree that some players who might be very good may have difficulty expressing and explaining what goes through their thinking process vs. someone who's maybe had to work harder at the process.  

There's a saying in sports sometimes that great players make bad coaches, while overachieving types of players are often great ones, b/c they had to build up the skill (not as intuitive or natural for them) and can often more easily relate/explain the thinking process behind how to improve.  That maxim isn't always true, but it seems common a lot.

In terms of content, I think most advance players are going to favor Friedman, because he is more thorough.  There's more than one reason Akobian does more classes for young people, and it's not just stylistic.  Considering everyone will have different needs in a lecturer/instructor, my opinion was just that: an opinion, and not a statement to be taken as some sort of objective truth.  If you are looking for an entertainer, rather than a lecturer who optimizes time with useful content and pedagogy, then I agree with you that Friedman is not your man.

I agree with Milliern about Friedman. By far the best IMO. Other than Friedman, I like Akobian and Seirawan reasonably enough, and RVK was good the few times he did it. Tatev was okay but maybe not the best teacher IMO. And of course Ben is funny but not terribly informative to advanced players most of the time.

The next time I see Julian I'll ask him what he thinks. On a similar topic, I asked him if he thought they were useful for his growth in chess and he said he didn't think the lectures helped him improve much as a chessplayer. But he did say it was useful that he played many games against Ben when he was low-rated, and got to play a lot when he was young. FWIW Julian is well over 2200 USCF nowadays.

I think Seirawan is possibly the best at adapting to his audience.  His Fritz Trainers are way, way better (for stronger players) than his St. Louis lectures.  Just like he's able to put on a great commentator's personality for events like the Sinquefield Cup, he raises and lowers the sophistication and jovial-ness of his lectures appropriately.  

I think I somehow forgot to mention that Ashley is a really warm and interesting lecturer.  Nonetheless, Friedman or bust.  

I forgot about Friedman... as far as I remember I only saw his lecture on the IQP. With the great reviews here though I'll definitely find some more of his to watch.

How does one report disruptive posters like this person?  

Can something be done?

Watched Irina Krush lecture last night and thought she was very good.  

I'd rank her right below Akobian as my second favorite at this point!

I like how she analyzes the position overall and then tries to come up with various ideas and explores their strengths and weaknesses (looking at what the opponent can do in response).  You can get a sense of how her brain is working oftentimes.  She also speaks clearly and not too fast.  Pretty good insights, although I still felt Akobian's were a bit deeper.  

I've now got my faves as:  

1.  Akobian
2.  Krush
3.  ???  after those two I'm not sure 

seriwan gets off topic so learn nothing and he is very slow seriwans the worst

I love them all , they all have something great to offer , I have my favorites too.

I say it is personal taste , I see people dising one of my favorites for eg , one guy I was listening to a while ago , was good , just had to turn his horrible vioce off , it was grating toppy and harsh , up and down all over the place with volume.

I like all I have seen mentioned

Is there a list of YouTube topics by these SLCC lecturers so that folks can go and watch the ones they want for a systematic learning schedule?

1. Finegold

2. Yasser

3. Var

4. Alejandro

The rest are just not worth it.

aviv and yasser, they both have different styles of teaching but both aim to teach u chess in-depth and that's what u need to become a better chess player. And also jonathan seems to be doing well, I know hes not a advanced and very good chessplayer but i think his teaching style is the perfect balance of humour and repetoire to show us how to learn. Meanwhile finegold is a clown rather than teacher

Finegold is great, perhaps the best teacher in the world, if you are 9 years old and require constant injections of elementary humor