UTG raise 999xx meets strong opposition

You're getting 7 to 1, plus another bet if you fill up, so I'd just call, draw two, and see whether anyone stands pat.

Yeah, I figured that would be the answer.

I folded it.

SB had a pat FH, which I beat had I filled up.

I agree with jbpatzer

SB was with a low stake, he might just want to try is luck.

What are the odds of filling up?
Do they exceed your 7:1 odds?

I like to calculate the % instead of odds.
If you call you'd need more than 13% = 0.2$/1.5$

the chances of making a full house or quads are:
1/47+(1/46+3/46) = about 11%

Do I calculate this correctly jbpatzer? ♦

You don't get 13% so a fold is in order if I'm correct.

There are implied odds postdraw and seriously...24/16 is not a 50/3, so sometimes you are ahead (I'm pretty sure he is capping 222 here)

well... actually on FL 0.1/0.2 unknown 3-bet > reg 4-bet

I don't agree.
On 0.1/0.2, I don't see much loose 4 betting tbh

And what was the sample on the villain?

Originally posted by elderwon
I don't agree.
On 0.1/0.2, I don't see much loose 4 betting tbh

And what was the sample on the villain?

On the "solid regular" several hundred hands.

I also rarely see 4Betting at $0.10/$0.20 unless they have at least a pat hand.

I thought that when Yadumalchtoona18let said, "actually on FL 0.1/0.2 unknown 3-bet > reg 4-bet" he meant that when an unknown 3Bets he is showing a stronger hand than when a reg 4Bets -- and I think I agree.

I think that this hand might have been the first time in 100K hands that I folded trips pre-draw w/o a misclick being involved.

The odd thing is that I misread both the unknown and the reg, but came to the right conclusion: I was beat, with little chance of success. As jb points out, I have *barely* break-even pot odds, but only if you include the implied post-draw action.

Cheers,
--VS

I see his and your point but on those stakes, imho it's of marginal importance.
I think it's gonna be different at 0.5/1 and up.