Raising from the blinds--why do the experts disagree?

[mrwatson23]

In the pre-flop recommendations in Small Stakes Hold'em, Ed Miller recommends raising from the blinds with AA-99, AKs-ATs, KQs-KJs, and AK-AQ. It seems obvious to me that all of these hands have edges in pot equity versus limpers before the flop. But, does that edge outweigh the post-flop expectation you usually give up by raising? Obviously I am not referring to AA or KK here. In the 3rd edition of Winning Low-Limit Hold'em, Lee Jones has adopted Barry Tannenbaums philosophy of being very selective about which hands to raise with from the blinds. Here is what Tannenbaum said in a recent cardplayer article:

"2. Raising from the blinds with the wrong hands: Many players seem to reach a decision when they look at their hand. They determine, long before the action gets to them, that they have a "raising hand," a "calling hand," or a "folding hand." Not only does this predetermination confuse them when they should fold many hands after raises, but they also make a number of inappropriate raises.
Raises from the big blind in an unraised, multiway pot are particularly inappropriate. Certainly, if you have A-A or K-K, you typically should raise no matter where you are. But after that, things get murky.
If we assume that four or more players have called, raising with unsuited high cards is almost always an error. You are making the pot large in a situation in which your most likely winning hand is one pair. You are creating a situation in which your opponents are getting correct odds to draw against you. And you will be out of position on the next three streets.
If you make this kind of raise, everyone will call. You will then be faced with an unpleasant decision after the flop. If you miss the flop, you will either bet into a field with no pair and slim prospects, or you will check and essentially invite them to bet and knock you out. If you hit the flop, you will be betting into a much larger pot than if you had not raised, giving them reasonable (or perhaps totally correct) odds to try to outdraw you. Plus, if you do get raised, you won’t know how to proceed.
I acknowledge that several experienced players and professionals believe that you should raise from the big blind in a multiway pot with A-K offsuit, simply because your hand is so much better than your opponents’ average starting hands. I disagree. If there are four or more players, I prefer to keep the pot small, and use the possible element of surprise post-flop to make more money when I do flop my pair.
Once six players are in, there are several hands with which to raise from the blinds, if only to add balance to the times when you raise with A-A or K-K. Raising with a small pair becomes almost a free raise here, as you are getting close to the proper current odds to flop your set. In addition, you will collect the extra bets that people will put in while drawing dead or nearly so because of the size of the pot if you do happen to hit a set. Also, occasional raises with hands like a suited Q-J or J-10 will provide you with the price you will need to draw with plenty of company if you happen to flop a draw.
In both of these cases, not only is your hand well-disguised, you will get a reputation for being an action player while actually making plays that will pay for themselves in the long run. And finally, these hands should be very easy to get away from when the flop misses you. Simply check and fold."

Some people have accused Tannenbaum of giving weak-tight advice, so I was skeptical when I read this article. However, Daniel Negreanu recently had this to say about raising from the sb with JJ on fullcontactpoker.com:

"Man, I might be a little out of touch with these micro limit games so correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't like the idea of raising with JJ from the SB in a multi-way pot.

Too often you are going to find yourself with a difficult decision as there aren't a lot of "great" flops out there for JJ. Pre-flop in this situation I'd generally look to slowplay and add some deception to my game, running the risk of allowing the BB to see the flop for free.

The other problem with raising is that you make the pot so big that it's now correct for people to chase long draws after the flop. I say keep the pot small, lose the minimum on bad flops, and surprise them once and a while when you hit a good flop."

I doubt many people would accuse Negreanu of being weak-tight. Intuitively, this advice makes a lot of sense to me, because your pot equity edge assumes you get to the showdown, but the flop will often be so bad for your hand that you fold before you get there. For example when you have JJ, the probability that a higher card will flop is 59%. Of course, the overcard does not always help your opponents, but it is hard to avoid folding the best hand, or if you are behind, giving up your chance to spike a set. I assume that this is an issue that has a definitive correct answer, so how can acknowledged experts disagree?