If your range is wicked strong with all the sets and TPTK and your opponent can't have any of those he is in a bad spot to face a bet, therefor you should bet. In general, your betting frequencies should match with the relative strength of your range vs your opponent. I would agree with this if our hand was in the middle of our range and our opponent is more likely to have us beat so in that instance we can check but this also means you shouldn't bluff here as often. I do realize that you might not be winning 50%+ when he does call and therefor some people wouldn't bet.

If he isn't going to call you with worse, so be it, he'll be losing a ton of money to you in these spots. If your TPTK is winning 80% of the time on the river when it gets checked to you, you should bet. I do need to point out that by 'often winning' I mean your hand vs the range of your opponent.

The deciding factor should be how often you are winning and let him decide how he wants to play, don't check behind in fear that you won't get called by worse. If they aren't calling your value bets, keep bluffing them until they adjust and are forced to pay off your TPTK in that spot, not the other way around. The argument 'but they'll never call with worse' often implies that it is profitable to bluff any two in that spot. If you almost always have the best hand and it's checked to you on the river, by all means bet. To the point bet your top pair for 3 streets depending on how often it is beat. Never betting two pair 3 streets is a massive leak no matter who your opposition is. Good point since two pair is going to be near the top of your range on a lot of boards. So i can muck any 2pair on the river facing a bet from you.

Poker 3 vs 2 pair