Based on the info you have on the player, blinds, stack sizes etc we really can"t afford to be calling down unless we"re pretty sure we"re ahead of their range when the flop lands. If Mark believes he"s ahead on that flop and turn then he"s got to call the river.
This would be true against a maniacal villain we believed capable of firing 3 barrells with air and giving him enough rope would exploit his tendencies.
It would seem OP doesn"t feel that is the case with this villain and that should change how we respond considerably. We flat pre, hit top pair ip on this flop ( K33 ), villain should be cbetting 100% here since there"s only a small probability we have hit. Equally, there"s only a small probability that villain may have hit so we can.........
Raise versus this wide range and take down a small pot when villain correctly folds the large part of his range we beat or calls/reraises with the small dominating part of his range. This is good for villain and bad for us.
With the stack sizes as they are this guy has enough chips to be small-ballling his way to hitting any ace, any set etc etc so why not put the question back to him on that flop rather than effectively giving him a free card?
This is the standard logic used frequently to support the "raise for info" position. Players remember being outdrawn, they don"t like it and take steps so as it does"nt happen again. You"ll hear statements like " I bet big to get him off his draws" etc. etc.
Being outdrawn happens and is a small factor in an overall profitable strategy. If you are not allowing your opponent to put chips in the pot with......
"any ace" 3 outs
"any pocket pair" 2 outs
You are missing shedloads of value.