[steve968574]

[ QUOTE ]
I still don't know why you keep bringing up QQ, if you would have read the whole thread I said I did not think anyone had QQ. The only thing that I had speculated on was that I was pretty sure the player to my right was raising with either and only pocket Aces or Kings.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stew, you were the one who brought up, in your original post, the possibility that the raiser had QQ:

[ QUOTE ]
I knew when calling the raiser he had an overpair and most likely AA or KK. In fact, I discounted any other hand except QQ as I'd never seen him table that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You allude to what would happen if the seven didn't flop:

[ QUOTE ]
keep in mind, that has to coincide with me flopping a set to be potentially harmful (in other words, set over set scenario). If I don't flop a set, then there is no set over set problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

My entire analysis, of course, was premised on the presence of a seven on the flop. That's because the point of my post (and yours) was, What must be factored into implied odds? When computing implied odds, you have to examine what the betting scenario will be, post flop, if you make your set. That scenario includes the possibility of the villain's pair making a set. Again, that factor may not be determinative, but it can't simply be dismissed. As you said,

[ QUOTE ]
I would never incorrectly fold a set if an A or K came in this scenario, at worst I'd check-call it down, there is too much money in the pot to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

In other words, your betting posture would be affected by the presence of an A or K (it would make you consider calling when you otherwise wouldn't), which of course impacts pre-flop computation of implied odds.

As for the odds of a set beating a set:

[ QUOTE ]
There is a 5% chance that two people will FLOP a set on the same hand which the last time I checked is 1 in 20 not 1 in 10.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, we have to assume the presence of a seven on the flop, because the entire point of this exercise is to construct a made-set, post-flop betting dynamic. Given your set, you have a 1-in-5 chance of facing a situation in which it's even money that your opponent has a higher set. The chance of ending up in that situation is what's important, not the pure chance, from the pre-flop perspective, of your opponent making his set.

You said in your last post,

[ QUOTE ]
let's imagine I do flop a set and an A or K hits the board. Do you really think I'm going to play the hand scared that I could be beaten by a higher set? NO, and if anyone does, they are playing scared poker

[/ QUOTE ]

That's actually reckless poker, simply ignoring an even-money chance that you are facing a higher set. You had it right in your earlier post, a check-call would be more like it.