This was a very situational play. I thought through it and given the flop action thought it was profitable given implied odds. Obviously I got bitched out afterwards, but I dont think my reasoning is too far off. I'll post my reasoning later if no one else gets there first. BTW flop bettor is very LAG with AF of 7.00ish if I remember correctly (tryed to post last night, but site was down, so posting now without PT database).

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed)

Preflop: Hero is BB with , . CO posts a blind of $5.
1 fold, MP raises, CO (poster) calls, Button calls, SB calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (10 SB) , , (5 players)
SB checks, Hero checks, MP bets, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls, Hero calls.

Turn: (7.50 BB) (5 players)
SB checks, Hero checks, MP bets, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls, Hero raises, MP calls, CO folds, Button calls, SB calls.

River: (16.50 BB) (4 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, MP calls, Button folds, SB folds.

Final Pot: 18.50 BB

Results in white below:
Hero has 3c 3d (full house, threes full of nines).
MP has 7h Ad (two pair, aces and nines).
Outcome: Hero wins 18.50 BB.

A lot depends on what kind of player MP is. If he's loose, as you said, you almost have to defend your blind with 33.

On the flop, you're getting 14-to-1 on your call. Borrowing from EP9's Sklansky-hugging, it's almost stupid to fold, even though you know you're beat on the flop. Most quality players will call a bet and peel one off given 14-to-1. The turn brings your gin card. You check-raise the turn (which will get you lambasted by the opponents of FPS--Fancy Play Syndrome) with TWO flush draws out there (a little dangerous) and get all but the CO to come along.

The river completes your boat--and you're legitimately only behind 99 or A9. You lead, get one caller and take the hand.

I like the play, but beware the two flush draws and the Broadway draw, because you're giving everyone odds who wants to chase, and even at 5/10, you'll get a lot of flush chasers...You'll get a chase from someone holding cards for a straight, a flush.

Here I agree with those who say that they check-raise was a bad move. People play Broadways aggressively, and flush draws aggressively. You easily could've been sucked out on there.

Anyhoo, vnh, and $185 in your pocket is always nice!

I think you played it perfectly, you're getting 14:1 on your flop call so I believe that is enough to peel one off and Bingo, you turned it. Played turn perfect too as you have perfect position right in front of the preflop raiser, so you can trap (almost) everyone for another big bet. And you lead the river. Textbook playing.

Party 5/10 shorthanded eh, maybe I've been playing too much 5/10 full, this game looks quite profitable if it wasn't for the crazy rake.

um... he's getting 14:1, but the odds of hitting the set on the turn are like 23:1. And one of the outs is possibly tainted. He isnt going to be able to jam if he hits with three hearts are on the board, so implied odds arent that great. This is a marginal to bad call IMO.

At the time of the hand I played mostly on rationalized intuition. I knew I was behind (obvoiusly), and I knew I didnt have pot odds, but given the bettors stats and the passivity of the table, I felt certain I could make a +EV play if hit.

After the fact analysis

I think the hearts severely taint the call as well. That should have possibly been the deciding factor to drop the hand. There are 46 unknown cards, although I can probably safely say at least 1 A or Q is in play. Assuming 22:1 odds to hit either three, I need to recover 9 small bets (4.5 PTBB) on the turn and river. The better is one off from me and he is betting for sure when checked to. If the turn checks around, I'm fucked and my read was wrong. With the check raise plan I recover my 4.5PTBB easy, and everything else is gravy.

If 3h comes, I lead out and call to a raise, realizing that I am still safe to play for a boat agree/disagree). If the boat hits, leading or CRing river becomes read dependent.

This play is very rare, but I still think that given the reads/positions on the table, the play is +EV. If I had 3h in hand instead I think the play is much better.

Being constructively critical, I don't like the call whatsoever. If you are following the basic Sklansky poker theory, this is just an awful decision it seems. I would consider it awful because you do not hold the 3h. Sklansky does not even teach to draw with the (correct) 7:1 odds needed for overcards, instead only assigning them a bare 3 outs, not the usual 6(not including backdoor draws). So...even drawing to a clear 2 outs is somewhat trivial, but of course this pot is fairly large and offering generous implied odds due to the Donkey nature of the table. The problem is that you have maybe 1.25 good outs. The 3h on the turn offers the flush as well as a redraw to a flush, so you're only pure out is the other 3. If you had the 3h in your hand, I could see how it might be worth it if you felt they donked off a lot of chips on the later rounds, but this situation is -EV no doubt.