Pre-flop Theory Question

A question: if playing 4 or more tables, amidst the almost constant change of players (many of whom have no footprint in either one's notes or in PT), how can these caveats--applying as they do to extremely confined and particular circumstances--be realistically applied? And if they cannot be realistically applied (and as I pose the question, it is obvious I harbor suspicions that they cannot), how can the recommendations that they support be implemented without risk to a bankroll?

The advice to play Axs, amidst other similar plays suggested in SSHE and HEFAP, is accompanied with warnings about the minimal edge such actions offer, under the best of circumstances. If one cannot, except under much less than ordinary circumstances, expect a positive result to said tactics, why bother with them at all?

[Benman]

If you passed on every hand that only has marginally positive expectation, you'd be a very tight player. I wouldn't give you much action on your good hands, thus reducing the expectation on those.

[ohnonotthat]

Three reasons -

1. Poker is [occasionally] still played in cardrooms.

2. You may have no read/notes on your online foes but that does not mean they have none on you.

3. These marginal hands are alot less marginal than the author suggests (author" refers to my assumption that these statements come from SSHE) especially once the holder of these hands gains in ability.

We are born knowing how to play AA profitably and we learn quickly how to do so with KK; Ax/s and the like require skills that are acquired as me grow; the author may or may not have taken this into account - I'm guessing that if he did he minimalized its significance.