I've been thinking about this most of the day, and I keep coming back to same thing. As per strassa's post a few weeks back about
learning how to play against good players, then adjusting, I've tried to figure out how I would play this against a top player, and then adjust it for my read on this player.
How many times would a top player call the fourth bullet, including two very significant bullets, with one pair? Exceptionally rarely, I would think. And if he doesn't have just one pair, he has us beat. We would probably only get a top player to fold 97 and maybe Q9 from the list of hands that beat us. There is, however, the little point that a top player is unlikely to have checked both the turn and the river, but we'll disregard that here. Assuming this player was a top player and played in this fashion, we would check.
Now, how would we play against someone who may be an average+ player for this level of tournament? Here, as well, I think a check is in order. Against this sort of player I think it is more likely that we would get calls from one pair hands such as KQ, AQ and JJ, but we would not get folds from any hands that beat us with the exception of maaaaaaaaybe 97. Again, I think it unlikely that a player of this caliber would check both the turn and the river, but as above, assuming he is this caliber and played this way, a check is in order.
Now, we get to where it seems our consensus read on villain in this hand is. Villain appears to be a weak player for this level, possibly got in here luckboxing his way through a satellite or had money to burn. Who knows. Here villain will fold no hands that beat us, and will likely call with rather weak hands such as TT, QJ and K9. Villains of this skill level are also reasonably likely to hold and check a flush on the river, calling against odds and wanting to check-raise for value. Against a player of this caliber it seems clear that a value bet is in order, as this player will call with many more hands that we beat than hands that beat us. If villain checkraises, it is a safe fold, as villain is probably not sophisticated enough to checkraise here on a bluff.
Now, as it seems our read is that villain is in the 3rd category here, we should bet. My lone concern is that I have said that villain has played this hand in such an odd fashion that I just am not sure if he has played a strong hand really well or a just played like a donkey. In reviewing it, I'm now inclined to think the latter, and that a bet is in order. Against a better player, clearly a check is the best play, but as of now, I only see evidence that villain does not fall into that category.
So, yeah, I think now I see that a value bet is a strong play here based upon our read that villain is a weak player who will call with many more hands that we beat than beat us.