25nl TT spewy?

[Lucix]

Villain was 27/4/2.3 (51). Effective stacks were 160BB deep. Is this flop play spewy? I hate being OOP here because Folding, 4betting, and calling all seem sort of bad to me.

CO: $20.80
BTN: $31.90
Hero (SB): $70.10
BB: $45.35
UTG: $35.40

Pre Flop: Hero is SB with T T
3 folds, Hero raises to $0.90, BB calls $0.90

Flop: ($1.80) 9 6 Q (2 players)
Hero bets $1.25, BB raises to $4.25, Hero raises to $10

[FlyingSaucy]

b/f > b/r > c/r > c/f > b/c > c/c

[Galapogos]

Folding seems really good to me.

[ATOTHEC101]

definite flop fold, raising is indeed spew.

[Muzzard]

Bet folding seems fine

[dalecooper]

Bet/fold - and if you decide to spew, don't fuck around, make a real raise.

[kmind]

b/f > b/r > c/r > c/f > b/c > c/c

Just wondering, but why do you think c/c is so bad?

[nutsinho]

how did you come up with this, flyingsaucy?

[Vi-Zer0Skill]

at 25NL i'd bet/call the flop and bet/fold the turn

[FlyingSaucy]

b/f > b/r > c/r > c/f > b/c > c/c

Obv this will vary depending on the two players involved and their history, so I put in general that's my take on it.

First I think opening is good as a cbet here range vs range. So generally will favor bet lines over check lines due to the stations that will call with worse. If your opponent is a typical dude at these levels that often calls from the blinds then he probably has a wide range and is either a station (1) or one of those loose pre/aggro post (2).

With that assumption established, if you open and player (1) is raising you, it is probably a raise that is more for value than fold equity. So b/f seems better than b/r. If he is player (2), b/r seems ok but a bit loose for my tastes, so I favor b/f.

The next 3 are b/r, c/r, c/f are fairly close. Actually in retrospect I could see c/r over b/r given that you want to maintain some level of sanity in the pot size - if ur b/r is called you are essentially fucked no matter who you are playing unless the two outer hits on the turn. Stations don't raise unless you are beat and player (2) types won't be willing to raise on that flop without a minimum of Q.

c/f is good versus weak tight because of the relatively low % that he's betting for fold equity alone. There's essentially no draws on the flop so he's unlikely to be semibluffing anything here. But of course we've assumed up to this point he's not weak tight. So c/f is discounted some.

The last two, b/c and c/c are close again. I can see these lines best used against a (2) where you are sure their range is something like top 40% pre and they are almost guaranteed to bet or raise the flop. In retrospect c/c might be better than b/c against typical aggros because their range includes lots of things you beat but they still may not be willing to raise a bet without a hand ahead of TT.

So modified and with further thought, I might say
b/f > c/r ~= b/r > c/f > c/c ~> b/c