Second-guessing Ed Miller's Short-Stack System

[PrincipalSkinner]

I'm confused.

On the one hand Ed has stated that he doesn't answer the tricky questions because he wants us to think.

On the other hand if I think, I find some parts of the system are difficult to justify.

Example: My understanding is that if we are in late position (unraised pot, limpers or not) we are supposed to treat 77 the same way we treat AA--big preflop raise. I really find myself resisting this.

I guess my question is: Was a computer simulation done which verifies that over the long haul 77 (and the other lesser but recommended-for-late-position hands) should be played this way for max profit? If so, how many hands were dealt in this simulation? If not, why should we play it this way?

Another question: Would it be +EV or -EV to play only "early position" hands no matter what position we are in? I mean as compared to playing the additional (looser) hands if we are in middle or late position. If I "think", I can come up with a good justification for only playing the early-position hands. If I continue thinking, I can come up with a seemingly equally good justification for playing the additional hands if position warrants.

And let's say I play 77 in late position with the big preflop raise and get one or more callers. My thinking says if I don't hit a set on the flop, I'm screwed. The old continuation-bet trick is my last hope. But if I try it and am called, my stack is gone. . .

Finally, if I was good at "thinking" about this game, I would not be using a beginner's system like this.

Thanks for any help! [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]