[vinyard]

[ QUOTE ]
The inaccurate numbers were taken from King Yao's book "Weighing the Odds in Hold'em Poker."

[/ QUOTE ]
Waahhh! I have no idea of King Yao's intent with those numbers. That book is sitting next in my pile just below Psychology of Poker. That being said, those numbers ignore those flops that contain an over but also one of your own cards giving you a set. Personally I like having a set. You might not.
[ QUOTE ]
It's a good book if you are concerned with trivial matters like how math applies to hold 'em poker.

[/ QUOTE ] Honestly, what's the point of this reaction when somebody is attempting to point out a not insignificant oversight to your original post/point? If you don't think that excluding those cases where you hit a set should be excluded from that list for functional purposes then I wonder if you really are "concerned with trivial matters like how math applies to hold 'em poker."