Calling a move all-in

[Magician]

Again, I know this is an "it depends" thing - but I've noticed that in general, players won't move in with the nuts on the flop or turn. They move in on the flop or turn with either:

a) a strong (but non-nut) hand
b) a semi-bluff (if you call they have outs)
c) a real bluff (rare)

One time I had just overcards (A high) on the flop, the pot was pretty hefty, one opponent moved in on me, I had a feeling he was making a move, I called and sure enough the opponent had just K high. I seem to be good at this - I'm sure I've folded to a lot of bluffs but whenever I do call it usually turns out to indeed be just a bluff or a semi-bluff.

So the question is:

Is it better to call a move in more often than you would call a large bet?

When a player bets big I tend to think he has more strength and if he moves in I tend to think he doesn't want to be called (implying some weakness at least).

[Rickfish]

Sounds about right. Calling an all-in or a large bet has to be justifiable. If you suspect the semi-bluff you still have to realise that the result is probably 50-50 unless their over-cards will not help. E.g. the flop is Ts5h2h and you bet and someone moves all-in. They could have something like AhTh which has 14 outs so you needs trips to be favourite (I assume you wouldn't have two pairs on this flop). If you have, say QQ, you could be the underdog against the semi-bluff or a big dog against trips.

My opinion is that whether it is a large bet or an all-in you have to put them on a range of possible hands and play accordingly. If your observation that they probably don't have the nuts if they went all-in helps you narrow the range of hands then that is fine but I'm not about to start calling all-ins with marginal hands. E.g. You have QcJd and the flop is QsTs2h, you bet and someone goes all-in, I would probably fold even though they could have something like As5s which I am a marginal favourite against because I can't beat any non-drawing hand like AQ, KQ, QT, 22, etc.