slightly common situation (from a debate)

[StellarWind]

My default is to call and strive for one bet per street. I doubt that raising any street is +EV relative to my overall pot equity and the risk of being reraised. This strategy pretty much negates his whole plan of betting out. If he's got me he could easily have checkraised me and gotten more. If this is a smaller pair he could have done just as well by calling down. If this is a draw he's lost his chance to checkraise when he hits plus he may bluff the river for me. Finally if I totally forgot to have a hand (instead of 99) then I fold with thanks that he didn't allow me to autobluff when he wanted to play the hand out.

With a solid hand range for Villain or some understanding of how he will react to a raise then I can consider playing it some other way. But that's not very common online. You don't want to be 3-bet unless you know you can fold. Nor do you want to set up a free card and then have no idea if you should be taking it.

An interesting question is why a good player would bet this flop against someone like myself. If BB is a maniac then maybe he's trying to blow me up, but with a reasonable BB the answer is much more subtle. The bet through the BB toward the PFR on an ace-high flop threatens a wringer. It's a very effective way of protecting or promoting an underpair because it's almost impossible for BB to keep anything less than an ace or an OESD. This simple trick conserves a bet compared to checkraising when SB wants to protect a doubtful hand like 87.

[Lmn55d]

yup, I would call here. good post