[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
Overall, I like the play a lot, because if you hit your set on the flop, you've got two turbo-lemmings sitting across from you who will build an enormous pot.

But Aaron's post has the nub of an interesting insight. Even with this ideal flop, you're not guaranteed to win the pot. Both the overpairs can chase two-outers for a set, and maybe one of them can chase a runner/runner diamond flush.

I assigned suits arbitrarily on twodimes.net, and you come out with a 77% chance of winning the whole thing after that flop if there's one guy with a faint shot at a flush. Say QQ includes the diamond queen. Then he's 13% and AA no diamonds is 10%.

So you're in great shape, but it's not quite 100%. Even if there's no runner/runner flush draw for either of the overpairs, your win percentage stays a whisker below 80%.

You had no way of knowing that you'd be up against both AA and QQ. Your odds would improve if there was only one overpair. Yet you want more than one opponent after the flop, and even a weaker continuing hand would have had an out or two. So your opening calculations need to be adjusted for the risk that you hit your set and someone else still musters up a better hand by the time the river comes. If that happens, I don't think you're getting away from the hand.

I think the play still works. But it's a much tighter calculation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great post and you are right that I did not take into account the fact that I could hit my set and still lose if the hand went to the river. But, I think arbitrarily assigning hands and cards to players in the game I was in or in general is not an exact science.

I also don't know where you got QQ at. I only saw one other hand at the river and that was the pre-flop raisers AA, I don't think anyone had QQ that I'm aware of.