The article presents a commentary on a randomized trial by Thomsen et al. comparing continuous norepinephrine infusion with repeated manual bolus administration for treating hypotension after induction of general anesthesia. The study focused on low-to-moderate-risk patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. The commentary authors commend the relevance and pragmatism of the original study addressing a clinically important question of periinduction hemodynamics. However, the commentary highlights the need for clarification of several methodological aspects that could influence the interpretation of the study's primary findings. The authors emphasize that these methodological issues are important for proper understanding of the results comparing both approaches to hypotension treatment.