[sdfsdf]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure this guy had the cards run over him for 16 hours. Why? Nearly every time someone played back at him he had a hand. Get reraised with AQ? Oh I happen to have JJ. Get reraised on the final hand? Oh I happen to have 88 heads-up. Get check-raised on the turn? Oh I happend to have AK that hand with TPTK. Reraise the UTG raiser and BB 3-bets? QQ of course! I can't think of a single time where he bluffed other than some weak-sauce bet on the river when it got checked down.

You can't beat a guy who a) raises a ton of hands b) always has a better hand when you play back at him and c) always calls your reraises with those better hands.

I think he got more good hands than the rest of the table combined.

[/ QUOTE ]
lol, you think he had a good hand every single time he raised? we will see when we see the hole cards, and you're going to be wrong. projecting a maniac image but only going to showdown with good hands is called playing well.

anyways, i agree with what bobneptune said. his style may be -EV in cash games, but lots of successful tourney pros play the same way. if gun hanson was there instead of yang and played the same way yang did, then everyone would praise hanson as a genius.