well part of the "problem" so to speak is with the QQ player - they didnt re-raise after the flop. QQ is way too weak in limit to slow play, as witnessed by the turn A beating them. had they re-raised before you after the flop, you would have a slightly harder time calling, but holding a straight draw, overcard, and nut flush draw i imagine you would have called.

your play seems fine - nice that the dominated ace didnt get you in trouble. the QQ player's play is dubious.

In limit hold-em, I think a check-raise from EP on the flop after 3 players have already called has zero chance of either (a) reducing the field; or (b) securing a free card. Thus, I have a really hard time with the assertion that this was a "textbook" spot for a check-raise.

I would go even one step further: in a 4-way pot, I think there are very few hands that are strong enough to even consider a check-raise in limit hold-em. Since you can't bet enough to drive out the players you've trapped, you usually accomplish nothing more than building the pot and giving the odds necessary to chase the cards that overtake your hand. I know that the poster here was not check-raising because he felt that he was in the lead, but a lot of players will try to check-raise with hands like a set or two-pair. Against a board the presents either straight or flush draw possibilities, the check-raise is a bad play, IMHO, with so many players still contesting the pot.