[PanRains]

I find it irksome (note: speaking as a fully funded player at 2/4 and 3/6), but not for the AK v 55 reason. If anything, for the opposite reason.

A shortstacked player fundamentally changes the game, both in ring games and in tournaments. If I'm up against a group of players with reasonable stacks, I may standard raise with fun, well disguised hands - suited connectors, small pps, that if I'm reraised, I have strong implied odds. Against shorties, T9s is almost certainly behind right now, and I don't have odds to try to catch up.

Or conversely, if I hold 44 on the BTN, you have a 100 BB stack and raise to 3BB - I have implied odds to perhaps take your stack or at least a portion of it. Whereas in my experience, not only do the shortsacks not give me implied odds (heck if I'm 8 to 1 flop a set, and nobody else is in the hand, someone playing with a stack of < 20 BB isn't giving me odds) usually these guys are making crazy big raises.

In my experience, it makes for a boring, tentative game.

Now what you're describing is somewhat different, and it sounds like you're benefitting from the psychological environment that perhaps you're creating.

Also, calling a CR on the turn with Ace high no kicker is probably not winning poker in the long run, not without a stone read, and I would suggest that perhaps you could have taken more of that particular player's chips if you had the full buy in at the table.