kondor said
Here is the thing, you say due to the size you found it very hard to play.  I do not think this is right to be honest, I think what you meant was that due to the size you found it very hard to win.  There is a big difference, and in this situation I think his sizing makes it very easy to play…

Well said, and this is an extremely important distinction to make. It takes a lot of work to develop the skill (and especially the discipline) to recognize when our desire to win the pot is hurting our decision making process.

I don’t mind the flat preflop, but 3betting is worth consideration. You’ll be forced to fold if villain shoves, but 99 is not a hand that flops many great situations multi-way and out of position, so collecting your fold equity and isolating villain may be worth the odd time we get 4bet by AK or similar.

As played we have a very clear flop decision. I would always fold, even against much smaller bets (maybe peel vs 1/4 pot but even that’s close). Villain’s bet range should be stronger than it would be in a heads up pot, the player left to act is uncapped, we aren’t closing the action, and we’re guaranteed to play the rest of the hand out of position. Most if not all of villain’s bluffs will have overcards to our pair and/or a flush draw, and there’s about a 5% chance for the turn to bring a card which allows us to call another bet. The large bet sizing is very polarizing but that is not the same thing as bluff-heavy, villain can still have all the good hands.

Torching 16.5bb with no plan for future streets other than “hope to spike a set or get a free showdown” is unlikely to be profitable. I would much rather continue with A4s or 87s (although against this sizing I’m rarely doing that) because they have much better equity against villain’s strong hands.