Child's QQ -v- Yang's JJ

[im a model]

another point on this: if youre on tv, wouldnt it be more of a reason to call here? if you call and he has you beat, you can say that it was a cooler and no one will fault you for folding. but if you fold and you have him crushed, you are universally know as a giant vaj. it seems like if you were on tv you would be more inclined to play standard poker so you wouldnt get berated by that idiot norm and have a bunch of stupid fish calling you an idiot when something goes wrong. like if you were to limp utg with AA and it didnt get raised and then the blind flops two pair, you know norm and every dumb fish watching is going to be like, "DURR THATS WHY YOU DONT SLOW PLAY ACES!" and ive heard pros comment that maybe they would have folded if it hadnt been on tv, but they didnt want to get bluffed out on tv. so in conclusion, upon further review, lee childs is even more of a gigantic vaj than it may have originally appeared.

[Silent A]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Childs bets 3 million and Yang says "all-in" for 11.78 million before Childs finishes putting in his chips.

Pot = 19.41 million, 7.78 million to call (Childs covers, but apparently not by much).

[/ QUOTE ]

If Childs covers, and the preceding action is accurate, wouldn't it be 8.78m to call?

[/ QUOTE ]

Typo. Raise was to 10.78 million. Coverage clearly says it was 7.78 to call.

I guess I thought, "7.78 is close to 8, 8+3 = 11, so 11.78". [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[Silent A]

[ QUOTE ]
Childs actually did not have Yang covered when this hand -- Hand No. 9 -- began. After Hand No. 8, Yang had around 14 mil & Childs 13.3 mil. ESPN was wrong/misleading last night here. McEachern says “this would be for almost all of Lee Childs’s chips,” but in fact, it would have been for all his chips.

Here is Poker News' report -- click the "Show This Hand" feature for chip stacks prior to beg. of hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

But remember this (from pokernews.com):

[ QUOTE ]
Hand #1 - Jerry Yang

Show This Hand
Hand #1 - Raymond Rahme has the button in seat 1, Jerry Yang raises from under the gun to 1.4 million, and Jon Kalmar calls from late position. The flop comes {A-Clubs}{Q-Clubs}{5-Spades}, Yang bets 2.5 million, and Kalmar folds. Jerry Yang takes the first pot worth 3.43 million.

Note: The opening raise sounds suspiciously high, but that's the number that Tournament Director Jack Effel announced. On the second hand, he misannounced the opening raise as 1.5 million, before correcting himself down to 750,000. It's possible he made the same mistake on Hand #1, meaning the actual raise might have been closer to 700,000. We may never know until we see it on ESPN.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pokernews was estimating Yang's stack based on this hand, but it may have been off.

[IAmJackStraus]

I think Childs should have gone all in there. I would have gone all in. When you have pocket Queens and a board doesn't have an ace or king out there you call it. I remember watching it live thinking Childs should have called. I can't blame Yang for going all in there but Childs has to make that call.

[AngusThermopyle]

[ QUOTE ]
if someone has raised the past FOUR OUT OF EIGHT HANDS

[/ QUOTE ]

To be accurate, three out of eight hands. The fourth hand he won, he had called Khan's raise pre-flop, checked the flop, and won with a bet on the turn when an Ace fell. Plus, one of the three raises was a reraise from the BB to Kravchenko's attempt at a blind steal. That leaves two pre-flop raises plus continuation bets.

This was the first time Yang had re-raised pre-flop besides the Kravchenko steal attempt.

[plzbenice]

lee childs seemed to be a genuinely nice guy though. seemed very humble.

i think it was pressure. he even said himself i think i made a bad laydown right after showing.

and yes asking his dad was over the line but at least it was just moral support and no specific advice on the hand.


i think he would been a good winner, marketable and a nice guy.


and ofc yang is a nice guy, yes the praying might be alil much but hey he gave a way a lot to charity and works to help people in contrary to msot people in this forum.

[plzbenice]

and btw it is quiet brave to make such a laydown on TV...

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't make sense to lead the flop, then fold after haivng invested this much of your stack. Despite it being early in the final table, Childs had to have some previous experience with Yang and thus could have easily put JJ/TT/AcXc in his range here.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is what baffles me. With Jerry's aggrodonk image, stack, as well as the strength of Childs hand in relation to that board, how one could lay down QQ here amazes me.

Plus, Childs played it SO good up until the fold. He raised UTG, got reraised, smooth called the maniac, got a dry flop with no A or K, and then did a "weak" lead out into a guy who loves to come over the top of weakness with a myriad of hands.

The plan should of been "I'm leading to give this guy the opportunity to do something dumb"; he did, and Childs STILL couldn't pull the trigger.

If Jerry has a set, AA/KK......you just gotta tip your cap to the guy and call it a night.

Get it in the middle, brother!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly right.

[gatorch0mp]

Poker development-
Phase 1: uber-noob... instacall Yang's push with QQ with zero analysis
Phase 2: overanalyze the situations, see monsters under the bed everywhere and make the "great laydown"
Phase 3: set Yang up and insta-call, if he's got a set or AA/KK or a draw and sucks out, then good for Yang

I know I've gone through Phase 2... I guess this is where this guy is at. Oh wells.

-G

[JustLuck]

against a guy like yang i would instacall here no need to think about it
yang is a maniac and by far the weakest player at this table
its much more likely that he has something like TT JJ or Ax than KK and AA
actually the only reason for folding QQ there is that childs thought he could outplay yang in the long run and take a huge pot of him when he hits a monster
i still would have called there.. it is time to bust him for overplaying his hands