EXACTLY given our image they put us on AA or KK .
given desc of 2 of the V's as tight and other as TAG; straight draws and 2 pair seem very unlikey
so we have Ax suited clubs or sets to fade on the turn.
A raise chases out all but the strongest of holdings.
V will correctly make the right play for the wrong reason

Are we unbeatable NO but We hope to get the other two to call the flop and maybe the TAG to raise even ,
If not let BB donk turn again.

against a different line up , sure I would agree with you to Raise
But given OP desc of the 3 V's calling is the better play.

I get it your scared ; better to take it down now .

Oh yes, I’m very scared. It’s not like in my first post I said I was raising FOR VALUE. You know, to get worse hands to call. Oh, wait.

We are at the top of our range and want to play for stacks. Stop worrying about extracting from the bottom of their ranges.

snowman, stop it with the strawman arguments. No one except OP has mentioned a raise as being for protection. Stop claiming to "get it" that they're "afraid." It is insulting and disingenuous.

You flopped the nuts and you have the OESFD to go with it. This is a very easy smooth call with two players behind. We have position on the player who has shown interest in the pot and a lag behind us who can look to make a squeeze play.

We can easily ensure more money goes in on the turn if the players behind us fold as well.

My approach in thinking about poker is to consider the more general, theoretical case, then adjust for the specifics of the exact situation. I think about the range of ranges I am up against, then try to narrow down those ranges.

It occurs to me that the tight player in the BB only betting slightly more than half pot feels a bit like a "see where you are at" bet, where he is more likely to fold to pressure than to play a big pot. Some tight players in this scenario are likely to slow-play or check-raise the top of their range and bet out with good but not great hands. If we can accurately make a read that he has that sort of hand strength, how does that change how we should play this hand? I think it depends a bit on whether or not we think the players behind us are capable of making the same read.

I can't imagine having a raise here when looking at my range. It's such a dream spot to call appear primarily capped yet with nuts and two players left to act. Great spot to stack someone.

I guess people like to raise red KK here, which I also hate, but if you play your range that way then certainly raise 76 here too. Gross though, and this is harsh, but learn to play live poker.

Putting our actual range aside for a moment, how exactly are we now more likely to get raised (over flatting) when the LAG types see us raise the already strong leading range? Ok. Also, what's wrong with getting flatted in two spots by ranges that likely have a combined 10% pot share?

It might change my raise sizing, but it will not change the fact that I am going to raise.

The BB leading into me, even if I know he will fold, means that I get to raise to pile in more money against the guys behind me without grossly overbetting the pot.

Look, if the LAG behind me has a "big draw", how do you think he plays it against a raise from us? I actually think in this situation it is hard to come up with a reasonable, large range of hands that a LAG would fold to our raise but raise with himself if we just call. I'm reminded of a hand I played once where a LAG cold 3bet shoved for 165bb or so with Q2hh on a flop of AhKh7x, facing a bet and a raise. Why he thought this play would be good, I have no idea. But the point is that when I have a monster I'm going to play it strong and let the LAG level himself, not try to trap. Trapping is for when my hand is weak enough that it gets proportionally more of its value from trapping.

I know that some LAG regs who I have played against for many hours will fold A2 or even a set if I put in a big raise. That's something specific to my situation and the table image I have. You can say that they're not really LAGs if they fold those hands, but really, they are LAGs who have learned to be cautious against me but try to run over the table when I fold (which I do a lot).

If I'm on vacation against a bunch of unknowns, I just raise. If I am playing against regs at home, I need to at least consider other lines because almost no one raises me without the nuts.

I believe that table image matters. Someone with a LAGgy image should raise here. Someone with a much tighter image might be better off under-repping their hand at least some of the time when they flop the nuts. Maybe you should raise 100% of the time here and I should raise some of the time but not always.

For people looking to go deeper into this hand, I think you should ask what your raising range should look like here and what your calling range should look like. And how your ranges are perceived.

For real though, I'll remember next time.

I'm getting there.

In the mean time, I'm pleasantly surprised anyone defended my play. Looking back with the nuances of the table and my image and things that are impossible for the internet to see there is merit in both flatting and raising for value. I'd probably prefer to do it over again and flat, but I think both players behind me would call my raise with a nut flush draw and could definitely put me on an overpair (which I agree is horrible and would never raise with red KK here) since it's been shown I like to raise with 'big hands' (per my 2 4bets preflop).

The whole point of playing this hand was to get out of my comfort zone a little and see what happens. I appreciate any criticism below 'kill yourself' as long as it includes some thought processes with it.

Marsh

Half of our overpairs have clubs in them...

Nut straight + OESFD /= quads.

The chances quad As is the nuts by the river is like 99% (exaggerated, I honestly don't know nor am I looking up the %), the chances a 7high straight is the nuts by the river is roughly 40%

Granted, with that being said, this would be the only combo of 76 I would flat some % of the time

This is an interesting one.

I agree with amanaplan so far.

I didn’t even mean you. The harshness was for those that are under the impression that raising this texture elicits more action than flatting. Even if some high end IP LAG pro-type correctly thought to himself ‘wow dude, you just can’t do that here’ when watching hero raise, the most likely outcome would have him folding.

Imagine raising here. Hate to agree with snowman and debated arguing for raise but I can't.

Just want to point out that just flatting makes most of these turn cards much more appealing especially if 4 go to the turn. One might argue that there is more value (if we have to use the term) in flatting>raising for this reason alone.

I’m not following you here. Can you elaborate? We are hoping to extract from hands like sets, A2, combo draws, and bigger flush draws. How is it more appealing to flat versus that part of their ranges when these cards will either kill action by putting a one liner or flush on board, or will actually lose us the pot (board pair, higher flush)?

I’m really in the flatting camp here as well for the reasons Amanaplan has listed.
You aren’t cutting off your value by flatting here at all.
You cut off your value by folding out hands that can’t catch up.

Sometimes you just have to brick a turn or river for max value.

I think what he means is that a combo draw can hit and still be behind; for example if the turn is an offsuit 2 we are ready to stack someone with 6x. Or if we make a straight flush we will stack someone with a flush (or boat).

I don't think this consideration is enough to make calling better than raising, though. I don't see how we are supposed to be stacking someone with 65 after they hit on the turn but we are also folding them out on the flop with any size raise.

That part of their range will take care of itself whether we call or raise, I would still argue that we lose some of those hands (like naked FDs and PPs and 65 A3-5) behind us when we make is 125 anyways. The main idea behind my post is that we want to allow them to continue w more hands on the flop (by calling) that can improve to strong second best hands on a lot of those turn cards you mentioned. If you raise and the board pairs, trouble. If you flat and board pairs, not so much trouble. Turned trips and sets and wheels will still make us money.

It’s also really about the two extra players behind though, particularly the good LAG who can have any two. They’re coming along with lots of hands if we call and they’re folding almost everything except for sets, lower straights and NFD’s when we raise.
If they have sets/lower straights they’re almost certainly raising here for us.
If they have flush draws we have two of their outs and the initial raiser might as well.
This is almost a tailor made dream spot for flatting with the effective nuts in a multiway pot IMO. We have a hand that we will never be put on during later streets when we flat given OP’s description of himself.

I disagree with most of you wrote but especially with this. If we are slowplaying the supernuts, why in the world would we assume that someone behind us would not slowplay a worse hand?

This is a big problem with not raising here. If someone else slowplays 2 pair or a set or A2, and then a card comes that means we no longer have the nuts--which happens fairly often--then we have a big problem, as we have either been passed or it will make it harder to extract value from worse hands.

Only flat here if last to act. Why are we trying to disguise our hand and widen our range? I advocate playing straightforward here.

In this case, I like a raise. There are so many hands that Villains can have that have equity and will want to continue, and that's not including made hands.

Any hand that doesn't have a lot of equity will shut down due to scare cards or bricks on Turn.

If you flat and 1 or both Villains call behind, are you good enough to fold if on the Turn:
1. A club (not Ac, 3c, 8c) comes
2. Board pairs
and there's heavy action?

As played, vs. Villain's donk with 88, if you flat on flop, does he really continue on Turn unless he spikes one of the two remaining 8s?

I think it's just unfortunate that even with 3 callers, nobody really connected with the board.