Facing Reraise on river...Villain on very tight range?

Villain is 15/10/1.2 over 123.
Hasnt done much noteworthy yet other than he has never 3bet, and typically plays passive on the flop and turn. His aggression is much higher on the river.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP2 ($10.05)
Villain (CO) ($10)
Button ($20.40)
SB ($10)
BB ($14.85)
UTG ($10)
Hero (UTG+1) ($10)
MP1 ($14.40)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with A, Q
1 fold, Hero bets $0.40, 2 folds, Villain calls $0.40, 3 folds

Flop: ($0.95) 4, 5, A (2 players)
Hero bets $0.60, Villain calls $0.60

I bet smallish on the flop b/c the board is so lame that unless he has a decent Ax hand, he wont call.
Given his stats and his flop call I would assume he is calling with 44, 55, A9+, TT+, although he probably 3bets w/ QQ+ preflop but Ill leave it in the range anyway.

Turn: ($2.15) 5 (2 players)
Hero bets $1.20, Villain calls $1.20

I lead out again, perhaps a bit smallish but I dont know. My small bet perhaps convinced him that I don't have an A but I really don't know. I was just tying to keep his AT-AJ in play. I am a little bit at a loss of what his calling range is....I am tempted to keep it similar to the flop: 44,55,A9-AK, JJ+

River: ($4.55) 9 (2 players)
Hero bets $2, Villain raises to $6, Hero ?

When he reraises me, I take out JJ-KK, AA is possible I suppose but most players 3bet preflop or at least during the hand. I feel like he is doing this with 44, 55, AQ+, AA.
Thoughts?
I know for myself, on the river against the preflop agressor, I dont usually reraise AJ on the river after calling 2 streets. Possibly AQ and AK.

Bet 3.25 on the river. 2 Under reps your hand hardcore here and leaves you with a shitty decision like this. If the range you put him on on the river is correct then there really isn't a question since you aren't winning ever. Still, betting 2 Dollars here was just meh. .60 on flop is fine. I'm probably making turn 1.45 but 1.20 is okay I guess. Betting less than half the pot is just asking to be bluffed here though someone with a 1.2 AG may not be capable of bluffing.

Basically your only question here is if his 'high river aggression' has bluffs mixed in with his slowplays. He is never doing this for value with worse so you are right to not include AJ in his river range.

You need to be right around 30% to call and I doubt you have close to that much equity. As a note you could include hands such as 54s, 65s and 76s in his flop range. If there was a FD on the flop and/or the river paired the board rather than the turn (meaning he is more likely to chase a straight draw on the turn) then you could call.

Bet 3.25 on the river. 2 Under reps your hand hardcore here and leaves you with a shitty decision like this. If the range you put him on on the river is correct then there really isn't a question since you aren't winning ever. Still, betting 2 Dollars here was just meh. .60 on flop is fine. I'm probably making turn 1.45 but 1.20 is okay I guess. Betting less than half the pot is just asking to be bluffed here though someone with a 1.2 AG may not be capable of bluffing.

i disagree and think bet sizing is okay where on the turn the board is very dry and your either far ahead (he has mid pockets/AJ-Ax) or he has like 55/44/54/56 and youre way behind, so you want to keep the hands you beat in and lose minimum to the ones you lose to.

also, your logic is flawed. if the 2$ bet induces a bluff then it is a good play because now we can call off the 4$ and make more EVsss against his bad hands. Also what hands are we expecting him to be getting to the river with that are bluffing now? most 10nlers arent calling down 2 streets with a weak ace in order to turn their made hand into a bluff on the river.

This hand is an easy fold.

i agree with you on his hand range exactly. A9+ and even more so when he finally re-raises on the river card. seems like he was calling to keep the pot small and not get to commited with a weak A and when he hit on the river he was trying to collect.
everything was really smooth till the bet-raise on the river. hmmm...
i'd probably take AA out of his range cause of the no 3bet, anyother pockets are deffinitly possible but i'd really be putting him on an Ax and I don't think you could have played it any differently. He probably would have called you on any bet not to big.
considering he's raising you pretty much just over pot value i'd have to say I'd probably end up folding in this exact situation.

Well played, good bet sizing imo. Now I fold unless you have a read that he likes to bluff rivers. Just a higher than his other streets' AFq wouldn't be enough for me unless it's ridiculously higher. I'd add A9 to his river raise range, btw, you have it on the turn but removed it for the river: {55-44,AK-AQ,A9}. Seems like a very small range but I can't see what else he would do this with on this board.

check turn if villain is any kind of capable of putting you on a range (unless you're trying to merge ranges or some level 4 crap like that that's unnecessary against a 10nl reg)

Originally Posted by eragotte

also, your logic is flawed. if the 2$ bet induces a bluff then it is a good play because now we can call off the 4$ and make more EVsss against his bad hands. Also what hands are we expecting him to be getting to the river with that are bluffing now? most 10nlers arent calling down 2 streets with a weak ace in order to turn their made hand into a bluff on the river.

This hand is an easy fold.

This is not necessarily true. If you bet a normal size then many opponents will never raise as a bluff, which is really exploitable since you can easily b/f for thin value. If you bet smaller and induce a bluff range to go along with your opponent's value range then this could be much less profitable for you. But yeah, he doesn't have many missed draws in his range or anything so easy fold here.

i like turn $1.50 cos i think the weak part of his range is calling that as much as $1.20, as played river sizing is fine (i prefer $2.5, but that's cos i fake block to get bluff raised in my games sometimes), and now you can fold to the raise fairly happily. nh

regarding your comment "His aggression is much higher on the river.", this is because he is only getting to the river with nut hands and missed draws = he's bet/raising or folding all the time = high af on the river.

This is not necessarily true

ya sorry i should have been more clear, i said flawed not wrong because what i said can be true in some situation, obviously not all as you have said.

Good stuff, thanks everyone.....

I did fold but was bothered by the fact that a player like him could only have such a small number of holdings after that river raise, that the unlikely event that he would have one of those hands made it a call. But it just seemed like it would be spew for me to call considering I'm behind everything he does this with and his betting says "you my bitch".

Originally Posted by Vinland

I was bothered by the fact that a player like him could only have such a small number of holdings after that river raise

Instead of being bothered, this should make you super happy. If he could be bluff raising enough of his 2nd pairs or something to make it a really tough river decision instead then it's time to get bothered.

he's repping a pretty thin value range here. especially after the five paired and knowing you have one of the aces. i still honestly dont think this guy has anything but 44,55,AK,AA. i like the smaller than average bet sizing on the really dry board as well. helps you get three streets from A9-AJ. and possibly sometimes JJ-KK. nice hand.

Originally Posted by rpm

he's repping a pretty thin value range here. especially after the five paired and knowing you have one of the aces. i still honestly dont think this guy has anything but 44,55,AK,AA. i like the smaller than average bet sizing on the really dry board as well. helps you get three streets from A9-AJ. and possibly sometimes JJ-KK. nice hand.

i think it's much more likely he shows up with 65s/54s than AA. so that means that there are as many combos as like the only pure bluff in his range (76s 'cause let's get real, 10nl'ers don't turn JJ into a bluff here). and it makes perfect sense and is expected for villain to call two streets on this dry of a board and raise the river for value than for a likely unimaginative 10nl'er to try to bluff raise you off of what REALLY looks like Ax/55/44.

i still stand by c/c'ing turn, btw

good point, i was thinking he was one of those straighforward nitty types who prob wouldnt bother with suited connectors unless multiway. obviously AA is unlikely because there is only one combo and he didnt 3bet pre, but i wouldnt rule it out entirely. i doubt he's ever attempting to bluff this river after we lead it, perhaps if we'd checked. i'm interested to know why you want to c/c the river surviva? is this for gaining river value or pot control? i'm thinking villain calls 1/2-3/4 pot on turn and river with all of A9s+,ATo+, maybe even sometimes TT-QQ, which is a range we obviously beat. also he appears straightforward so i feel we can comfortably bet into that range, knowing if we encounter resistance, he probably holds the stronger part of it, and we fold. seems like a way ahead/behind spot where we are going to be way ahead more often than behind.

well, i said c/c turn, not c/c river.

i don't think he has A9s and ATo after preflop action much less are we getting 3 streets of value out of him unless he's a bit of a drooler. maybe he'll call two streets with QQ-JJ, but we can just make those two streets flop and river (knowing that he's never going to bet turn/bet river with those hands).

so basically whatever hand we can get value from on the turn, we're better off getting value from on the river because we're gonna be value-cutting ourselves if we go for 3 streets.

here's another way of looking at it: if our PF range is AQ+, 77+, then we have the very bottom of our range once we bet the turn.

my mistake, i meant to say c/c turn. i'll edit that. against most villains i would typically only try for two streets with one pair but my think was that this board seemed dry enough that we could perhaps get more value from 3 slightly smaller sized streets than the standard two streets.