NL200: TT button -- does villain know how strong we are here?
 

Here we find TT on the button, villain in the bb is new to the table and new to me, as I did not have any stats on him pop up on my hud. We open the button and get 3bet slightly more than pot. Looking for a line check here against an unknown. Do we just pitch it on the flop? I like a float here with TT ip to reevaluate after his turn action. Does anyone like a raise on the flop? I thought about raising the flop, but felt like I would almost be committing myself to put all the money in the middle with 100bb stacks. I feel like this is reasonable given villain is unknown, just making sure I'm not being too nitty here. I would assume villain recognizes we are strong here when we call pf and call the flop bet ip, but I guess that is a situationally dependent viewpoint. Interested to hear some different opinions here. This may be super standard, but I'm looking to see how we generally approach unknowns. Thanks guys.

Full Tilt Poker, $1/$2 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 5 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter

Hero (BTN): $204.25
SB: $311.40
BB: $200
UTG: $238.15
CO: $297.15

Pre-Flop: T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] dealt to Hero (BTN)
2 folds, <font color="red">Hero raises to $7</font>, SB folds, <font color="red">BB raises to $25</font>, Hero calls $18

Flop: ($51) 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 Players)
<font color="red">BB bets $35</font>, Hero calls $35

Turn: ($121) 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 Players)
<font color="red">BB bets $75</font>, Hero folds

Results: $121 Pot ($3 Rake)
BB mucked and WON $118 (+$58 NET)

Re: NL200: TT button -- does villain know how strong we are here?
 

I like this line against an unknown and to me this line looks pretty standard. Reraising preflop essentially turns our hand into a bluff and raising the flop, too. I'd have to have a very strong read, villain is capable of 2nd barreling in 3bet pots, to continue on the turn.

Re: NL200: TT button -- does villain know how strong we are here?
 

I agree, unless you've had a history with villain and know that he's capable of double barreling in spots like this, then I give up on the flop. Also, since you don't know villains 3-bet range from the BB against your button raise, I give him credit for a big hand.

I either re-raise the flop or fold here, but as played, I gotta fold the turn with you.

Re: NL200: TT button -- does villain know how strong we are here?
 

Good things. Thanks guys.

Re: NL200: TT button -- does villain know how strong we are here?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I agree, unless you've had a history with villain and know that he's capable of double barreling in spots like this, then I give up on the flop. Also, since you don't know villains 3-bet range from the BB against your button raise, I give him credit for a big hand.

I either re-raise the flop or fold here, but as played, I gotta fold the turn with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: NL200: TT button -- does villain know how strong we are here?
 

You just have no idea what you're getting into preflop and 3-bet pots are so read dependent. Are you playing against a LAG who is going to cbet any flop 100% of the time and your TT on this board is basically the nuts, or are you playing against a 12/9 where your TT is barely playable on a 742 board? You're just setting yourself up to make huge mistakes when you don't have a read, so I fold.

Re: NL200: TT button -- does villain know how strong we are here?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You just have no idea what you're getting into preflop and 3-bet pots are so read dependent. Are you playing against a LAG who is going to cbet any flop 100% of the time and your TT on this board is basically the nuts, or are you playing against a 12/9 where your TT is barely playable on a 742 board? You're just setting yourself up to make huge mistakes when you don't have a read, so I fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like it Dire, that logic is what led to my fold. Looks like I possibly could have done it one street sooner, though. From what I'm gathering, it seems as though we're essentially going to be calling pf for set value against an unknown, for the aforementioned reasons.