for starters: I never said I did limp in with AA....secondly, i do occasionally limp in with big pairs. Not often, because its -ev, but often enough that it keeps people on their heels. "oh, he limped with AA, so, he must be stupid" or i planned on limp / reraising, and it back-fired. More often, i raise with hands like 10♦10♠ rather than limp with them if I'm trying to throw someone off.... Either way, i attempt to randomize my play simply because *HELLO* It's a good thing to do. I also love how you move away from the fact my examples prove you wrong, and instead you insult me as a poker player. Nice going chief.
You're not understanding the basics of the language here stormswa. I gave you two (2) examples of how the language is worded different with the same meaning. You said its not even close... would it have made a difference had i said JJ instead of QQ? The comparative strength of QQ to AA is horrible anyways, but JJ is even worse. Its sometimes the right play to simply call a raise with JJ when it is NEVER right to simply call with aces unless you're trying to throw someone off. In both examples, I explained how the language says two different things, but means the same thing. Its akin to saying "The fox doesn't run fast" and "the fox runs slow" they mean virtually the same thing.
Finally: Yeah, sometimes i'll limp in with 10♣J♣ from EP.....hell, if the game is passive enough, i'll limp with as low as 6♣7♣. NOthing beats making the nuts for almost nothing. I play the table, and the people at it... Not the cards.. the cards are almost meaningless man.
Lets recap: Randomizing your play is a good thing...it makes you harder to read. Limping in with small suited connectors from any position in a passive game is okay, you don't understand the meaning of the words you type, and Styrofoam majored in English throughout college, and arguing semantics will get you no where, as you'll likely lose.
