Does "knowledge" cause suck-outs?

[John21]

"Sorry, I thought you we're making a Squeeze Play," was his response after his Q9o cracked my aces.

Said player opened the pot from MP;
CO called;
I raised pot in SB;
Opener went all in;
I called;
(he caught a 4 flush to win hand.)

My question is: if he hadn't heard of a "squeeze play," would that hand, and the eventual suck-out had ever happened?

Or to create a hypothetical scenario: Say it's a person's first time playing a NL tournament and he's in the BB with 85o and the Button raises - more than likely he would just fold. But suppose he just watched Mike Sexton describe "how the BB sensed the button was trying to steal his blind and came over the top with nothing," and makes a move he wouldn't have made before - creating a potential suck-out situation.

I saw a perfect example of this on tv, where a player went runner runner for a straight when he was actually trying to just make a move. He bet on the flop; got raised; called raise; and then went all-in on the turn with a gutshot draw; he ran into a set; got called; then hit the straight.

I had another hand where I led out with top 2 pair and got put all-in from a player with overcards because "he thought I was just betting the flush draw."

I'm just wondering if alot of these situations are occurring because of the information and "knowledge" players are getting from books,tv,etc... creating potential suck-out situations that wouldn't normally occur with a less "knowledgable" player.

[APipeDream]

Suckouts absolutely occur more if you're a decent player, because your money is in with the best hand most of the time...you can only lose by the suckout. For instance, when your set of 3s gets beat by a straight made on the river, yes, it's a bad beat, but would less experienced players have played a hand like pocket 3s after a pf raise in the first place? Most wouldn't, but they'll sure call off their chips with QJ when T9 is out there on the flop. The bad beats from "making a move" happen, and there's not much more I can say about that. It sucks when you're the victim, and I personally think better players pull this more often than amateurs, but sometimes the deck just isn't on your side.

I went broke yesterday in a tourney the same way Dags did in the 2005 USPC...SB went all in with no previous callers, trying to steal my blinds. I had pocket 10s and called. He held 84o, but the flop was nice 444 for him. DOH!!!

[InternetJunky]

Maybe the guy with Q9o wouldn't have pushed if he hadn't read about squeeze plays, but don't you think that's a bad thing? You desperately WANT someone with Q9o to do this when you hold Aces. I see people mis-applying the concepts from the books all the time (without knowing the stack sizes and betting amounts from your post we can't even know if the guy made a good decision that you were going for the squeeze play either) and I think it's a great thing.

Make a mental note about these players and then proceed to beat them at the meta-game level. In your case, next time you get a big hand pre-flop make it look like a squeeze play again praying that you get the same action. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[John21]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe the guy with Q9o wouldn't have pushed if he hadn't read about squeeze plays, but don't you think that's a bad thing? You desperately WANT someone with Q9o to do this when you hold Aces.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong. It's a great thing.

What I was getting at, is if this type of situation occurs twice as often, you're stack is at risk twice as often, effectively doubling the volatility.

And with that increased volatility, has a TAG style (with it's slow stack building nature) become obsolete?

I'm just wondering if the only counter-measure would be to take the risk of building a big stack (to offset the increased amount of times you're stack is being put at risk) or busting out with a LAG or Hyper-LAG style.

[d240t]

Actually, if it happens twice as often, it isn't risking your stack twice as often. Example, AA vs Q9o, you get all in, now you win 80 something% of the time. Now you have over twice the stack. So the next time it happens, you won't be all in for your stack (someone else will be).

[Redshift]

Agree...not matter what knowledge a player has of the game, if he keeps getting in all his money with the worst hand then the knowledge essentially does nothing to improve his game.

[Quanah Parker]

To give OP a straight forward answer to his questions.
Kinda
Sort of
Maybe

OK, bare with my sarcasm. I get bad beat more often than I suck out, but a lot of my suckouts have happened like you describe with the Q9o.
I get too smart for my good. I think I've got some donks number when he raises from the button vs. my A7 in the bb.
This donk will fold I think, as I put him all-in.
Whammo, he intsa calls with AK.
I hit my 7, and thank the stars.

Not the kinda win I'm proud of. I woulda prefered Villian folded the Q9o I imagined him to have.
But a win is a win.
I'd might be a lucky donk for one hand, but this is a good way to learn through expierence. I try to count my blessings and leave my fishy ways behind for the rest of the tourney.