Also the more people are in the hand, the bigger chance you have to lose it. So rather play against 1 opponent, in this case you see risky overcards even though you hit 3 of a kind.
But like I said, on the long run and most of the times wont hit nice trips or there are higher cards at the flop, so it is always risky to play with 99. It totally depends what fase you are in the tournament/what position/skill level of opponent etc etc..
Joined: Mar '14
Age: 45 (M)
Almost every player at the table had around 125-bb or more in chips on level 3. You (danydave) had 194-bb, the deepest stack. It would put you in a really awkward situation if the 3-bettor (player 7) elect to 5-bet (and shove) after you 4-bet with 99 from small blind. So, I think flat-calling pre-flop was ok and I would take the same line on three post-flop streets (K/C, K/C, K/C (or K/F)). I guess the player 6 had KJ or KT, and the player 7 had AK?
Edited by Tony_MON7ANA (Saturday, July 09, 2016 @ 20:13 GMT)
Joined: Mar '11
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 50 (M)
I would have definitely raised after the flop. I think you would have got at least one customer with a big re-raise. You let them get to the river very cheaply, in my opinion, but at least it worked out all good in the end
if I played this game, I would have done rireyz after any bets against me ... maybe I say that because I had seen the hand completely ... maybe ... I understand that you wanted to hide his strong hand ... probably should rejoice small, then large enough
Joined: Jul '14
Age: 47 (M)
3-bet pre-flop could have been a great alternative to your move. unfortunately the board allowed several other possibilities that hampered his raise on the river, and you could easily have lost his hand for showing weakness in pre flop call. any other player who had bluffed on the river would force you to fold. lucky for you that was not the case.