PokerStars - $0.50 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players

BTN: 172.38 BB
SB: 62.72 BB
BB: 110.72 BB (VPIP: 19.38, PFR: 15.42, 3Bet Preflop: 9.28, Hands: 233)
UTG: 101.5 BB (VPIP: 33.33, PFR: 33.33, 3Bet Preflop: 33.33, Hands: 9)
Hero (MP): 153.26 BB
CO: 100 BB (VPIP: 11.11, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 10)

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Ah Tc
fold, Hero raises to 2.42 BB, fold, fold, SB calls 1.92 BB, fold

Flop : (5.84 BB, 2 players) 6c Qh 5c
SB checks, Hero bets 2 BB, SB calls 2 BB

Turn : (9.84 BB, 2 players) Ts
SB checks, Hero bets 4 BB, SB raises to 9.2 BB, Hero calls 5.2 BB

River : (28.24 BB, 2 players) 6h
SB bets 22 BB, Hero calls 22 BB

Villain is prob a fish as he does not play full stack but I don't have hand history to state otherwise.

On the flop I just make a cBet of 1/3 pot with almost my entire range as it contains one high card an I am IP. Villain just calls (would a passive fish not raise?). I think it is not likely that the fish has a AQ hand now as he did not raise on the flop.

Turn I hit my T so I make another bet now the villain make a small fishy raise which seems odd, sofar I only have a bluff catcher and 5 outs to a better hand, but as the raise is so small and there is a good chance the villain is an aggro fish I decide to make the call.

River is a complete brick and villain bets again a substantial raise which seems more inline with a aggro fish then a passive fish (would they not just make a 1/2 pot value bet?). Well I go with my read.

What do you think of the risky line taken?