[La Brujita]

I don't think it is a bad play at all. It is a play I make sometimes to mix up my game. The reason that it is pretty good is that it is a solid example of a semi bluff where you are able to fold to a reraise but have a decent chance of winning the pot. Whether it is a winning play in the long run (in similar circumstances) depends on many factors including number of players in the pot, how much of calling stations the players are, deepness of money etc.

To answer your subquestions:

(a) I would checkfold most of the time but would make your play a small percentage of my time to vary my game and if the conditions were right to try and take the pot.

(b) When I am deciding to make a bet here what I am trying to do is make as small a bet as possible without making obvious I am making as small a bet as possible. I think a bet of 100-120 is optimal imo. 90 is a pretty solid sized bet. I want to bet less than the pot to conserve my chips and because a pot sized bet is not necessary to convey you have a J or flush draw and overcards (or whatever hand you think your bet might represent). My thought is 100 is a good bet for optics reasons, some people's thought process would allow calling a 90 bet but not 100 due to three figures.

(c) depending on game type, you should occasionally make the same bet with 7-2 but it is an incredibly better play with second pair. The reason is that in HE a semi bluff is much better than a naked bluff because a flat call and you have a chance to improve on fourth street. You might get a huge amount of disguise to bet for value if a 2x comes out.

This is why I thought Howard Lederer's play (he is the player I respect most) with 6-3 was somewhat weak. He feld he needed to bluff at some point but there was plenty of time for a semi bluff rather than a full bluff.

I think you posted a very interesting hand fwiw.

Regards