I don't think most players at NL5 qualify as 'thinking' players (and almost certainly not this particular villain so I do agree with sizing it bigger pre. Can probably get a little bigger on flop and turn vs. this player too I guess.

But as to the decision in question, I'm having trouble grasping exactly why it's a flip-a-coin decision. I guess we don't expect this players stats to change a WHOLE lot as sample size increases. Maybe it's because bad players play bad and bad players do stupid/unpredictable things at stupid/unpredictable times?