2/4 shorthanded AA vs 55

[ChuckTs]

I put him on a queen and thought he checked it so he could get my continuation bet in the middle, but he had me locked.
His flop check-call was the wrong move IMO, as it let me draw out - he only bet half the pot on the turn, so i was inclined to call and got a lucky river card.
Any thoughts?

 

[spore]

Nothing wrong with the play here that I can see. A low pocket-pair that hits on the flop is always hard to see coming. Luckily you got redemption on this one

You can make an argument either way on calling/folding on the turn. On one hand, it is a good quality to be able to lay down a losing AA hand. However; it's hard to know you're behind here. Maybe thinking he was betting on an AQ/KQ type of hand?

 

[ChuckTs]

truthfully i didn't even consider 55 or 22.
i put him on a Q and thought he was not slowplaying, but trying to draw in money from me by letting me bet (if that makes sense) - on the turn i thought i was still ahead, but decided to call just to play it safe.

 

[mrb0981]

It seems to me it was obvious you had a big hand... I don't know why he wouldn't have check raised on the flop. Yeah, he could have scared you away, but raising the amount you bet probably wouldn't have shaken you off those A's. In fact I find it difficult to believe that he would have been able to shake you off of those Aces at anytime. A rainbow flop with one high card makes it hard to lay down Aces. Especially when you raised to $16 preflop, he should have a decent hand. I wouldn't have put someone on pocket 5's or 3's either. So at that point, you're betting he doesn't have pocket Q's, b/c you know he doesn't have two pair.

So yeah, I might feel a little dirty for sucking out, but not so dirty I wouldn't take his money . Besides, you had a great starting hand, and I think you played it correctly. I would have played his hand differently, but I would have also lost more money.