is my statement factual?

[tjd2001]

Very interested in everyone’s take on not just the hand, but of my statement at the end:

Background: 1/2 NL at Trop in AC. Everyone involved in the hand is well stacked (having >$300 max buy-in). I have about $400; Villain has about $600 and, by my estimation, a very good player. We both have been at the table for about two hours.

By way of further background, my table image (to my chagrin, but by my own doing) was firmly established the rotation prior to the hand in question. I hadn’t played a hand in three rotations and I am dealt AKo in early position. UTG raises to $25 (slightly more than the $15 pre-flop raise that was standard for the session). I call. MP Calls. LP Raises to $60. UTG folds. I call. Player to my left goes all in (~$250). Re-raiser goes all in (~$350). I fold. Opponents show KK vs. QQ. The very next hand, nearly the same thing happens. UTG I am dealt AKo I raise to $20. One player in mid position calls. A player in late position raises to $50. I call. MP goes all in. Reraiser goes all-in. I fold again. And AGAIN I expose my cards out of anger. Opponents show KK vs QQ again.

Now comes the hand in question: I have As 3s UTG. 8 total limpers. Board comes 3h 3d 5s. Checks all around. Turn comes 8s. Both blinds Check. I Check. Player to my left bets $7. 5 callers back to me. I re-raise $25. Original better calls, as do 2 players in mid-postion and both the blinds. 6 players to the river and one of my few scare cards hits, the 5d. Small blind checks. Big blind bets $140. I fold. Folds all around. Villain exposes 8/9.

I would appreciate comments on my play (weak fold? Was my betting too passive, i.e. should I have done a better job at cutting down the field)

Also, my friend took exception to my following statement (I will follow later with my rational): “It was much easier for villain to make that bet (even with nothing), then for me to call his bet (with a full house).” Agree?