[Veil]

[ QUOTE ]

am i the only one that can admit.. that in this hand .. if i
had held QQ [...]the thought would go through my mind. "the way this guy has been raising like nuts i bet i have him beat... i'm gonna call. but wait.. what if this hand is the one that he has a monster. an overpair? a set? we've played against each other before and he knows i'm not fooling around with my raises.... he knows i've seen him overplay his holdings before. he wouldn't bluff me here... he wouldn't make this move against me when he knows how much of my stack i've already committed to this pot. he knows that i SHOULD call him here with the pot size being what it is. he's too smart of a player to bluff me right now. maybe i'm beat. do i really want to go out this early? i have a big enough stack to fold here. .....


[/ QUOTE ]

Some good intermediate-level thinking here. However, the bolded part is where you make the potential error. Can I assume you haven't played in the main event for several days before? The thing you're missing is that you're over-complicating the situation. Childs and Yang had no doubt played for many, many hours prior to the final table. If Childs is a great player then its his prerogative to realize Yang's level of thinking, and what Jerry's capable of in terms of out-thinking Lee. The great player part isn't necessarily correct. In fact, from what I've seen of Yang, he was very capable of re-raising pre-flop utg+1 with 8/8+, A/7clubs+ and then making this exact play without thinking it through as logically as you have construed. Sometimes you just need to "dumb it down."

This is the dumbed down version of the situation:

"Alight, I've seen how this Yang guy plays, he's one of those suicidal lag big-bet maniacs and raising machines - I need to watch out for him at the final table if he acquires some chips. Now at the ft: okay, he's been raising or re-raising pre-flop just about every single hand so far ...I have Q/Q utg, let's raise...he re-raises me...there's no way in hell I can possible put him on an over-pair...I mean, wow, how lucky can this guy possibly be getting? IF he has it , good for him, but hell, it's so so so much more likely he doesn't have it. Let's just flat call for obvious reasons. Okay no overcards, I'm probably gonna go with this hand but let's see. I check. Yang bets huge...alright I have to go here, I can't get away from this, if he has it, well done, but the odds and the psychology are in my favor by a long-shot and what a spot to double up to the chip lead (?). I'm of course beating all of his zeros (possible one over hands) which he probably has 20% and I'm even beating many real hands such as any flush draw and 8/8 to J/J which I'm sure I've seen him overplay plenty before. I'm all in..." Yang calls.

Now as an aside, if this hand had have been played by Cunningahn and Ivey, there's not even a point in analyzing the situation, because there's just no way of knowing how many levels of thinking they were going through, and how many different prior hands (the last few hours? the last few years? My sly/intrusive comments?) affected the final outcome and betting lines. But amateur Vs semi-amateur? Huh-uh. My dumbed down version rates to be accurate.