[Lloyd]

[ QUOTE ]
My logic at the time: I felt (incorrectly) that UTG+2 had AK, AQ, possibly AJ.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why did you not consider a pair? It's dangerous to put your opponent on such a narrow range of hands.

[ QUOTE ]
When I called the raise, I thought "I'm all in with an Ace or Queen on the flop, or if its raggedy.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's great that you have a plan for the flop prior to seeing it although it doesn't seem like you to stuck to it. [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
or think I have have a bigger overpair if either has a pocket pair.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think if you really had a big pair you'd re-raise pre-flop.

[ QUOTE ]
They are risking their tournament by calling

[/ QUOTE ]
True, but it seems like you're getting to the point where people will have to take some risks, even in marginal situations. So if they get a decent piece of the flop or have an overpair they will most certainly call.

[ QUOTE ]
For this reason alone, all-in pre-flop might have been the superior play (not a good play here, but simply better than the way I played it) -- although UTG+2 very likely would have called with QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]
Obviously he would have called with QQ. But more importantly, you've got a hand that is very easily dominated and not one that I want to risk a lot of chips with after people have already entered the pot. I don't mind playing AQs because of the flush value, but you have to be able to get off the hand when dominated.