I make it a practice to rarely slowplay but I'm thinking this might be an ideal spot. Nobody showed aggression PF, one of the villains is the BB, and the flop is relatively harmless. Do you bet out or attempt to trap here?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t100 (5 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Button (t835)
SB (t2190)
Hero (t1650)
UTG (t6180)
MP (t2645)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 2, 2.
1 fold, MP calls t100, 1 fold, SB completes, Hero checks.

Flop: (t300) 6, 2, 4 (3 players)
SB checks, Hero???

I would lead for about 150.

I like to build pots.

No other comments?

QFT

The reason you play small pocket pairs is so you can win a big pot when you hit a set.

I probably lead out 100/150, about 80% of the time here.

In a trapping spot like this, often it's the table's impression of you that's more important. If you have an aggressive image, betting your set is a trap in itself because you're more likely to get loose calls or even a check raise. Either way, you're getting more value from your set.

Only if I'm positive that the button will use his position to bet, will I check... to raise all in though, because you don't want to get too cute with your stack.

I know, the question is whether you're more likely to win a big pot by betting out here or trapping.

Good point about table impression. I hadn't been terribly active in the tourney but keep in mind that I checked in the BB here, which means I have the deception factor to my advantage. It would be difficult for my opponents to put me on a hand. But the fact that I hadn't been terribly active up to this point might suggest that betting out on this flop would raise alarm bells for my opponents.

I think you lead here for about 150. On this flop, they either hit or miss and they either believe you or do not. I guess it goes to how they percieve you. You being in blinds and a ragged flop(although connected), villains could easily think you are full of it and call with OCs or a small piece of the flop. You may even get played back at in this type of situation.

My worst fear is to give a free card leading to 4 to a straight which has possibility to complete either villains hand.

I would be more inclined to slowplay if there WERE action preflop. Put in an enticing bet and see what happens.

I bet to build here. With no preflop action, there is not much worth playing for in the middle right now, but more importantly, I have no reason to believe that the button will bet the flop for me, so I'm giving a free card to potential draws in a small pot where I would have a hard time folding on later streets. Not good. I'd bet half pot here, which is what I'd bet as a continuation bet as well, so hopefully it gets read as an attempt to take down an unwanted pot. If button calls, I might (depending on turn card and reads) check the turn to induce a bluff, but I bet this flop almost all the time.

I typically would lead with a set, but I think an argument can be made here that checking and trying to trap is better. Realistically, this flop is not likely to have hit many hands or even created any draws. Maybe MP has a midpair. Maybe SB caught a small piece. But, most likely, neither has anything. Also consider that there are very few scare cards that can come on the turn. So, to break it down, if nobody has anything, a bet takes it down. If you check, then two good things can happen: (1) the MP might take a stab at it, or (2) he checks and the turn card hits one or both of them and you can build your pot there.

So, to sum up, since there is very little risk to you in giving a free card, I think checking may be the better play here.