“Du bist selbst Trainerin […]” – Why do we need “selbst” in this sentence?

Question

Du bist selbst Trainerin in einer Kinkels-AG an einer Grundschule in Oldenburg.

(This sentence is from an audio in my MOOC course. So it is possible that I misparsed Kinkles, but it doesn’t seem to matter for this question.)

I think this sentence means:

You are a trainer in a Kinkels AG at a primary school in Oldenburg.

If yes, won’t it be sufficient to write this sentence without selbst? Why do we need selbst in this sentence?

Answer 1

Dieser Knickels-Trainer hat große Erfolge. Du bist Knickels-Trainerin. Nutze doch seine Methoden!

These are unconnected sentences.

Dieser Knickels-Trainer hat große Erfolge. Du bist selbst Knickels-Trainerin. Nutze doch seine Methoden!

Here, the second sentence refers to the first one by confirming you are the same as this other guy. This selbst is a more personal alternative to auch, ebenfalls, ebenso.

Du bist doof. – Du bist selbst doof!

Answer 2

The sentence would be sufficient without the "selbst", but it's probably added for emphasis. You can compare it to the difference between "You're a trainer at..." and "You're a trainer at... yourself". Without further information about the context, we can't really say what the emphasis is about.

Answer 3

"Du bist Trainerin in einer kinkels AG an einer Grundschule in Oldenburg." wäre eine sachliche Feststellung.

"Du bist selbst Trainerin in einer kinkels AG an einer Grundschule in Oldenburg." klingt nach einem Vorwurf oder Kritik an der Person.