I don't think I've actually run into anything horrible on this one lately, as my AA has generally taken these pots down, but it is a situation that worries me.

Let's say you have AA, and have raised, and the flop comes 772. How do you play this?

This is what I was actually looking for in SS when I ran across the "set over set" comments.

Basically, I've been betting out my AA hard both from upfront and in position. In one situation I had a weak bet coming to me, raised it to pot and got a fold, but AA is obviously quite vulnerable here.

Brunson says to bet it upfront, but he checks that flop from behind--betting 662 because he doesn't want to have to deal with a straight card. At my tables, anyway, I'm generally more worried about flushes than straights simply because it seems that soooooted cards of almost any kind are so popular for calling raises with. And, while the paired board should be scary, they in actuality can put me most often on a big pair that this board didn't improve.

Brunson's reasoning is that on 772, he's either beat and needs to catch up (with 76 or such) or else he wants his opponent (presumably with something like JT) to hit something and try to take it away from his presumed AK.

This probably isn't a bad idea either. Maybe just play it defensively from LP, at least if it's rainbow. I think they're now more likely to dump big bucks into a bluff (sensing weakness) but bet small on something like 76. As soon as two flush cards show up, however, I think I have to bet it one way or another.

But how about this one: You bet and get raised. I guess you just have to let it go immediately, right?

Similarly if someone bets full pot into you. (both of these against unknowns here--it's definitely different with some reads, such as knowing what this particular opponent likes to call raises with, whether he's going to bluff at you, etc.)