Sets

For the most part, I don't fear sets. I don't worry about them; I don't want to think about them. If someone has a set, then so be it. I'll make more money overall by playing strongly against the possible hands I can see than the imagined hands I can't.

There's only one problem with my reasoning -- it's a bit naive. I think it's a good strategy in many games, especially when playing against unpredictable players that like to run a lot of weird bluffs or nonsensical all-ins.

But to entirely discount the possibility that your opponent holds a set undermines your ability to read his hand. You can't put your opponent on an accurate hand range unless you consider the chance that he does hold that perfect pocket pair to bust your Aces in the hole.

The probability that anyone holds a set in any given hand is relatively small. That said, I believe it's possible to anticipate when you're beat based on betting patterns and reads. An obvious example is when you hold AK with an A on the flop vs. a very passive player who suddenly raises and re-raises. He might have connected his low pocket pair with the rags on the flop.

There is more danger in overestimating the chance that you're up against a set than underestimating it.

But ignoring the feasibility of a set entirely is thoughtless, -EV poker.