PBP: Renton Theorem zohmygod

[novel20]

This is not really a theorem. And the donk limp call raise OOP with AA is awful.

[Renton]

haven't bashed you once, and i'd appreciate critique.

Also if it weren't obvious the fact that im even calling it a theorem is basically a joke, because its a super simple aspect of poker that pretty much any decent player understands at least on some level.

[Renton]

[ QUOTE ]
This is not really a theorem. And the donk limp call raise OOP with AA is awful.

[/ QUOTE ]

explain

[Sounded Simple]

[ QUOTE ]
lol @ this therom, I would correct the wrong parts in it

[/ QUOTE ]

Please elaborate.

[SABR42]

IMO, limp-calling with AA is only ok if you regularly open-limp in EP.

If you never open-limp then it's pretty pointless...

[mistere45]

Is this a new concept? I approach NLHE by playing for the big pots, not grinding out small bets. Deceiving my opponent about the strength of my hand, as well as widening the range of hands he can put me on is always my goal to maximize the profit on those big hands. I play for the big pots. It helps that the live game I play in has tons of implied odds. But is the concept you have conveyed here really a Renton Theory original? If so, I have been implementing your theory without realizing I owed you credit. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Renton]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this a new concept? I approach NLHE by playing for the big pots, not grinding out small bets. Deceiving my opponent about the strength of my hand, as well as widening the range of hands he can put me on is always my goal to maximize the profit on those big hands. I play for the big pots. It helps that the live game I play in has tons of implied odds. But is the concept you have conveyed here really a Renton Theory original? If so, I have been implementing your theory without realizing I owed you credit. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Also if it weren't obvious the fact that im even calling it a theorem is basically a joke, because its a super simple aspect of poker that pretty much any decent player understands at least on some level.

[/ QUOTE ]

[EPiPeN11]

[ QUOTE ]
haven't bashed you once, and i'd appreciate critique.

Also if it weren't obvious the fact that im even calling it a theorem is basically a joke, because its a super simple aspect of poker that pretty much any decent player understands at least on some level.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've attempted to bash me multiple times, such as in the November thread, the hand I played "wonderful" and the sarcastic comments in that person's thread etc.

I am not going to help you out and share my knowledge on the game, especially to someone who clearly tries to put me down.

[mistere45]

[ QUOTE ]
IMO, limp-calling with AA is only ok if you regularly open-limp in EP.

If you never open-limp then it's pretty pointless...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an important point. I rarely limp with Aces OOP. A limp-call would only work if you have a wide range of hands you limped-called with in EP. I choose to raise in early position, and usually when I come in the pot EP im raising. I can smooth-call/limp with aces in LP.

[Renton]

lol, i chided u for bitching about variance in the context of claiming to be gods gift to poker, and i poked a little fun at the fact that you posted a hand that you absolutely didn't want critique on and were sure you played perfect.

I think that in order to have a ridiculously large poker ego you need to be prepared for the baggage that comes with it, part of which is being made fun of a little for being ridiculously egotistical.