Getting lucky against a slow-player (or passive player)

[fatdave]

Every so often, I'll make a play that could be perceived as dumb, but I'll end up hitting and raking in a huge pot. It's typically the sort of play that ends up with the other player(s) going off on me in the chatbox.

However, I feel that they only have themselves to blame. If they had protected their hand, I wouldn't have been in there to take all their chips from them.

An example, below. A $55 MTT on Party, down to 64 out of 420 people, top 50 get paid.

The hand, more info below:

NL Texas Hold'em
Level:8 Blinds (150/300)

Seat 9 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 1: Seat 1 ( $2300 )
Seat 2: Seat 2 ( $2350 )
Seat 3: Seat 3 ( $8021 )
Seat 4: Seat 4 ( $5210 )
Seat 5: Seat 5 ( $7710 )
Seat 6: Hero ( $9885 )
Seat 7: Seat 7 ( $2695 )
Seat 8: Seat 8 ( $10808 )
Seat 9: Seat 9 ( $2150 )
Seat 10: Seat 10 ( $4440 )
Level:8
Blinds (150/300)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Hero [ Qh Kh ]
Seat 2 folds.
Seat 3 folds.
Seat 4 folds.
Seat 5 folds.
Hero raises [1200].
Seat 7 folds.
Seat 8 calls [1200].
Seat 9 folds.
Seat 10 folds.
Seat 1 folds.
** Dealing Flop ** [ 8h, 7h, As ]
Hero bets [2900].
Seat 8 calls [2900].
** Dealing Turn ** [ Ac ]
Hero is all-In [5785]
Seat 8 calls [5785].
** Dealing River ** [ 5h ]
Hero shows [ Qh, Kh ] a flush, king high.
Seat 8 shows [ Kd, Ah ] three of a kind, aces.
Hero wins 20220 chips from the main pot with a flush, king high.



I had just moved to the table a few hands prior and really had no reads, however I didn't expect the player below to go up against one of the few people at the table that could really hurt him, near the bubble.

I think the other player made three mistakes in this hand:

1) Not re-raising a late/middle position raiser with AK.
2) Not re-raising with TPTK after the flop to protect his hand (ie, if I had went all in on the flop, he would have called immediately, but he didn't want to bet himself all in).
3) Not doing either of the above two against somebody that could cripple him on the bubble (he eventually limped over the bubble with his 900 chips or whatever).

I'm trying to find where I made a mistake in this hand. I could have bet less on the flop, but I personally don't think he would have came over the top (since he didn't when I bet the pot). On the turn, since I had bet representing the Ace, I could have checked, representing that I had made trips, and he either would have checked behind me (which would have been a mistake for him, I believe), or protected his hand by betting out (which I'm not sure he would have done, but at which point I would have folded, not wanting to put all my chips in on a passive draw).

Instead, I go all-in, knowing that he can only call me with AA or AK (which he happened to have).

The reason this is in Psychology is because this is something I have a problem with frequently. I feel that I played this hand much, much better than him because he failed to protect his hand and put himself in a dangerous situation that he could have gotten out of by merely raising even once.

Is the quote "The Fortune Favors the Bold" really true, or are plays like this very -EV in the long run?

If I hadn't hit, sure I might feel dumb that I put all my money in on a draw, but at least I was being aggressive at the right time. I wouldn't have seen this river if I was in calling mode, because I wouldn't want to risk all those chips on a draw by calling passively.

I'm having trouble what I'm really trying to express here. Perhaps you Psychology/Poker geniuses can interpret what is going on in this post, and help me come to terms with whether this form of aggression is valid or not.