I like the thought, but the math is wrong. Set-over-set when all the money goes in is much higher than 1% because people don't play and give action with random hands.
This is a point to keep in mind, plus it also answers the previous question on why Harrington recommends avoiding 22-66 when hunting for sets (in some positions). The probiblity of being beat set-over-set increases with the lower sets. Although this wont happen very often, it will often cost you your entire stack when it does. Plus, what happens when you are set hunting with your 44 and the flop comes 488. Maybe you dont lose your stack to a player with 89, but you don't win the hand on one of those few times you caught your card. Contrast this with playing JJ. You will catch that J as often as you would catch a 4 while holding 44, but you will lose set over set much less often and flop like J88 won't bother you at all.