IMO, he sounds like he's regurgitating information he doesn't himself understand. But then again, that's just my opinion from seeing a few of his videos. Still, for lower rated players they could be useful.
Youtube Vids.
Sort:
As I am in such a category lol, maybe that's why its fascinating to watch.
Fair enough, I suppose the I'm not really part of the target audience, so I shouldn't be complaining 
vis videos are quite good for beginners. i checked out some of his grandmaster analysis vids, and he was trying out things that were way over his head. not a good idea imo..
Any idea on his ranking? If he is making good beginner to intermediate vids and struggling with grandmaster, could that be a communication error to the audience or do you think he's just an average player?
I find Kevin's videos very good. I also enjoy listening to 'matojelic'. He's great. There's an English guy I a avoid because he pronounces 'three' as 'free'.
I will check out matojelic. I probably have seen him but never paid any attention to the name. Thanks for agreeing that Kev's vid's are good.
no idea about his ranking, but he does not seem to be a very strong player. usually i myself do not have any idea about whats going on in a supergm game, but i can make sense of the moves with the help of a good commentator. i find the difference in quality of commentry between untitled players and titled players to be huge. one common symptom of a bad commentator is the one who puts too much emphasis on the results, and tries to portray the win as a smooth sailing from the move one..it rarely happens that the loser (usually a respectable 2700 player) had no idea, and played like a complete idiot and did not try to prevent the plans of the winner..always suspect such a commentary.
pingo, he does tend to point out there are soo many variations that he only has time to do the main lines. Good point on listen to a commentator thats titled vs one thats not. I have done more of one and less of the other.
I've never seen those videos you mention, but I second the recommendation for Mato Jelic. His youtube videos are very informative and fun to watch.
its not always necessary to go into every sub-variations. omitting sub-variations are okay if one is able to put forward the main points across.
matojelic is good. his videos are good for practicing tactics. i wish i had someone telling me during a game, "this position has a killer move, find it." it does not happen in a real game. you have to judge for yourself when there is a killer move and when there isn't one..
for learning strategy i suggest watching chessnetwork videos. he is quite good in explaining basic ideas.
Is he the guy who pronounces 'three' as 'free'? King to a'free'. Maybe that's a youtuber called KingCrusher.
He's rated 1850 in standard and 1370 in blitz here. I suppose that's high enough to talk about openings, but I would take more 'involved' analysis from him with a grain of salt (as you should with everyone really).
Yeah, he gives some good commentary. What cracks me up about him are his Bobby Fischer videos..He always calls Bobby's opponents by either their first or last names..but he ALWAYS calls Bobby, Bobby Fischer..always uses his full name
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKTAYd-fQOA&feature=endscreen&NR=1
Watch this one. Nothing special but if you are able to pick apart what he is explaining, feel free to do so. Or, as an experienced player, explain how you would explain it differently. As a beginner I am probably more inclined to do what he says so-to-speak but, for limited time ect, he always explains, to me, the best way to do things based off of common and widely used openings and positions.
Which leads me to my next question; is that what elite players do different, throw such a curveball that common play and basic study can't deal with?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzJV750f80k
check around 1:50..
listen to his comments on g6,Nf6 move order (Bg7 not inserted)..he he explains it with knight before bishop rule..its not good enough..notice in few moves black played for d5 break in the center grunfeld style..d5 would not have been possible without Nf6..so black had to play Nf6 before Bg7 if he really wanted to play for center break with d5..otherwise white would have had the option to play d5 gaining space and kicking the knight on c6, the resulting structure will be benoni-ish..probably a bad version for black..
its understandable why gelfand went for grunfeld type positions..he really picked up the opening since world championship match with anand.
to put it simply, explaining grandmaster moves are not that easy. its much more complicated than just knowing basic opening theory..they always throw curve-ball to each other to push their opponent into unfamiliar territory.
My lineup of youtube authors on chess is:
1.Backyard professor (Best scenery, most enthusiasm, and uses a big demonstration board, along with many chess books.)
2. Kingcrusher ( Gives good reasons for throwing Alexander Kotov's book "Think Like A Grandmaster" under the bus. Kingcrusher will always get to that in "the next pass". He abstains from Houdini going through the games the first time through.)
3. Meto Jelic
4. Narz
5. Kevin (don't know last name.)
6. Others
The Backyard Professor has em all covered
I watch a fair amount of YT vids on chess before I go to bed. Now I hope this doesnt sound rude lol, but does anyone find themselves glued to all Kevin's video's? I just really enjoy his commentary and the various video's he puts up.
Has anyone ever had a game against him?