Middle pocket pair against pf raising chipleader

[Emperor IX]

Seems somewhat tag, but noticed he's been playing position a lot. Is this a call?

pokerstars Game #11916083661: Tournament #60466241, $1.00+$0.20 Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2007/09/07 - 01:00:46 (ET)
Table '60466241 1' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: socksmatch (2400 in chips)
Seat 2: pats_baby (1700 in chips) is sitting out
Seat 3: diewildetina (1375 in chips)
Seat 4: Tazmanical (4770 in chips)
Seat 7: mattyj65 (1685 in chips)
Seat 9: Emperor IX (3380 in chips)
mattyj65: posts small blind 50
Emperor IX: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Emperor IX [7d 7h]
socksmatch: folds
pats_baby: folds
diewildetina: folds
Tazmanical: raises 300 to 400
mattyj65: folds
Emperor IX: calls 300
*** FLOP *** [9c 4c 4d]
Emperor IX: bets 500
Tazmanical: raises 3870 to 4370 and is all-in

 

[joeeagles]

He raised 4BB's instead of 3, and that's the part I hate, but stacks are deep enough to play it for set value and the fact he shoved that flop makes the PF call correct, cause I have no reason to believe he wouldn't shove if the flop were 744, which would double you up.

The 300 is less than 10% of effective stacks so on one hand it's good to go, but on the other hand though it's ideal to play for set value when pot is multiway rather than HU. But overall, it's a PF call that I believe is acceptable.

What I don't understand is why you lead out on the flop. The ideal move here would be to check/call and reevaluate on the turn if he fires again. As played, you have to fold since you say he's TAG because the shove has nothing to do with position and it probably means a PP bigger than yours, something like TT/JJ which in a way explains the 4BB's PF. I doubt it's a stone cold bluff.

Of course if I'm correct on his range, the fact you lead out doesn't change anything but in principle I just think it's wrong.