Agreed. The percentages of stack size, and then the calling off ratios are very valid. In fact, often a fold is a big mathematical mistake.

I'm thinking here, though, that V is shoving with a monster. We could be mathematically correct in calling, yet if we read Villain for a set most often, then isn't a fold the best (most optimal) play?

I keep coming back to - how often does V hit the King with us? It's like flopping a set. It happens, but not that often. If V hits the King, yes, it's a shove for V, yet how often do they smack that flop with KJ? Not that often.

How often to they call pre with any PP? IMO, much more often. They just have to see a flop. I guess AQ or AJ would cal and do the same thing, yet I wonder, how often?

For the most part, I'm still thinking we're behind here, and I'd rather not ship V the cash until V shows me he's capable of shoving light.

Another aspect is that I believe $1-$2 players think in terms of absolute value, for the most part. Meaning stack to pot ratios are not considered. If they have a big hand, they make a big bet, with no consideration for pot size.

Like when a $10 limped pot gets bet $25 from a Soccer Dad. He's got a big hand IMO.

well, we can´t really make you call, if you want to fold, fold.
all your reasons behind doing so though are based upon memories/history/gut instinct, just a highly intuitive aspect, and nothing quantifyable, on a complete unkn villain.

one question, what is your b/c range on this board, vs a slightly more than pot size raise?

Yes, very true. Bet/call here I'd think sets, and 2 pair, which I'd rarely have, so sets mostly where I'm hoping to get it all in now.

I understand the reasoning of we're probably making a marginal fold based on instinct. If that is truly the case, then in a vacuum, snap call.

My thought is that in a vacuum, given the action pre, Villain is only doing this with made hands. Kx? Yes. Sets? Most often.

Grunch: Never folding. Especially without reads. Might as well not even play the game if we are willing to. Plus we have Ac.

The only way I would ever fold that for the small stack sizes would be if the guy is a pure OMC. 99% of the time this is an easy snap call.

+1.

Yeah, why would anybody bother to respond to such a mundane question?

Anyway, thanks guys. Just wanted to see if anybody had second thoughts like I did. I guess I'm not the only one.

I don't see this type of player around KC at NL tables. We only have three little rooms. The OMCs (and there are a lot of them) are pretty much just playing LLHE (at the two rooms that even have LLHE) and chasing the bad beat jackpot, which is usually $200K+ by the time somebody hits it - about 2 or 3 times a year. And I'm about the nittyest player I see at these $1/3 NL tables. [see spoiler]

Actually having the Ac in our hand is worse because it takes away combos of nut flush draws that villain can have.

Lmao and we would include this hand...

I do understand the second thoughts OP I just typically like most wouldn't have them till after this snap off call because against most Villains with his stack he plays a set really weird like flatting and prolly flatting the turn too lol