I'm currently trying my best to learn as much theory as I can.

I play Live Low stakes NLH

My question:

When we hold a hand that beats our opponents ranges preflop and are facing aggression, what do we consider when facing a decision to iso raise or call with opponents behind?

The situation:

200nl live game 9handed.
Hero 300 (utg) KK
V1 250 (mp) ?
V2 350 (co) ?
V 3 125 (btn) ?

Reads:
Hero slightly loose and above average agression vs table. Has shown down bluffs and value hands on rivers, but most hands no showdown.

V1 and 2 weak and loose pre, stations postflop.

V3 is normally tight Reg but is tilting it up and on 3rd (short) buy in

Hero raises 12. V1, V2 call, V3 raises to 60 .

Decision point:
to minraise knowing I will likely get this heads up and V3 is always putting in the rest of his money. His range is easily 99+ AKo, AQs+. We are winning roughly 68% v his range plus dead money
OR
flat and allow one or both of the players behind to call (with approx 1.5PSB each) with hands our range is curently beating?

I guess this is a classic protection vs value scenario. Obviously an ace high flop should be bad for us as it will either kill our action or crush our hand. We are not deep enough to have the ability to bluff any opponents post flop as they are often calling and folding if they miss here when we don't 4b pre.

Sorry if this post comes off confusing or messy, I really appreciate any help or input that you guys can give to a theory noob.

I think you are UTG, hard to play that hand OOP vs 2 lags, go ahead and make the raise, if they come along fine but more than likely your going to get V-3 stack plus the lags dead money, I ll take that all day.

I think 60 is so big that V1 and V2 are not going to flat call, but I would flat and give them the opportunity. If they hit their board you will get stacked, but with KK you putting in 1/5 of your stack pre-flop is very rarely wrong. You just have to deal with variance if you lose. (I would shove almost any flop)

However, if villian 3 had made it 25-35 or so, I am raising all day. It is just giving him and others too good odds to play as good as your hand is.

As long as you don't fold you can do no wrong here.

My personal vote is to shove and play for V3's 125 stack, as it's ridiculously +EV and also very easy. You could argue that calling may be more profitable, but it's hard to quantify by how much (and how much of that added profitability requires you to make the right decisions postflop), brings along additional variance, etc.

Besides, who knows, you may still get called by V1 or V2 who talk themselves into calling with TT-QQ or whatever.

The problem with flatting is V3 is so short that he almost always gets to a showdown. If one or both other Vs come along and the flop is A high, we check, we can't really call a bet from any V (other than V1 betting and V2 & 3 folding) because we lose so often against >1 V on that board.

Also, if we call and V1 calls, V2 is almost getting the correct odds to call if he has a PP

Because of that I would just shove. If V2 or V3 would call a raise to say 120-140, they're probably coming along regardless because they're droolers or slow playing

By flatting and checking the flop we are getting a free look at what everyone else is going to do first OTF because we know V3 is jamming. We are essentially the "button" to V3's jam. We're also giving V1/V2 an opportunity to possibly even bet before V3 jams, which has the bonus advantage of telling us they did not flop a set, since they should also realize V3 is the only sure thing left in the hand so long as they check to him and it would be foolish to risk scaring him away with their set. So if they do put in a bet this will allow us to play optimally for the rest of the flop and OTT and OTR. If they do check we can either flat V3's shove or raise depending board texture and on what we've picked up from V1/V2 in their action so far.

If you want to do some analysis of this situation, it starts with figuring out which hands V1 and V2 will call with if you just call.

Generally, once I get into territory where I calling is 25% of my stack preflop or when a call will leave a pot-sized bet behind, I tend to go into push-or-fold mode preflop.

Whenever we enter the realm of complex situations I like to take a step back and look at a few fundamental concepts of poker.

Equity: When we have majority equity we want as much money into the pot
Odds: Whenever possible we want our villains to call for more than their hands are worth without getting proper odds
Ranges: Villains at this level tend to put preflop raisers on AK and only AK
Stacking off: Villains at this level will stack off with TPNK or better and draws regardless of getting proper odds for the draws or not
Mistakes: Whenever possible we want to play in a manner that gives our villains a chance to make mistakes and bonus points if they make compounding mistakes

So, returning to the situation I like a flat because:
It enables our other villains to make a mistake and either call or even shove over the top (yes, a re-shove would be rare but it does happen, V's can overvalue 99/TT or be slowplaying AK/AQs and decide to shove now...). I also like a flat because the raise to $60 already denies proper odds for set mining so our villains will be incorrect in calling to set mine and can likewise decide to go with their pairs post flop putting the preflop raisers on exactly AK (which happens all the time in LLSNL)

There is a decent chance that our villains can be holding an Ace blocking each other which means likelihood of an Ace hitting should be fairly low, and if it does hit, meh, we fold, big deal.

I like our relative position, V3 will be jamming pretty much all flops, so we can check flop and if we are lucky V1 or V2 will bet and commit themselves, either way, more money for us

Obv shoving preflop is +EV, but I just think flatting is more optimal, we give our villains a chance to make mistakes and we pick up more money...

Another way to think about this spot is, Which choice gives you the highest probability of making more money?

We are 100% going to get it in with V3 no matter what, so that is a given
If we shove we fold out V1 and V2 a high percentage of the time (I would guess 95% of the time).
However, if we flat, I would say 30%-ish of the time V1 or V2 come along for the ride and if V1 calls first then the odds V2 comes along and "gambools" probably rises to 60% . Now, once they see the flop, odds are that they each will hit the flop 30% of the time, so between the two of them one of them should hit the flop around 50%-ish of the time and players at this level are notorious for stacking off with TPNK or at the very least calling bets....

So basically, I flat simply because it enables our villains to make the most mistakes and gives us the most money longterm ...

I like flatting to get extra money in.

The exception is if V3 is a special type of player who is giving up on the flop a significant amount of the time - then just get him to commit his chips pre. This isn't usually the case when he only has $65 back and the pot is $150+ though.

I hate our relative position because if we check the flop, V1 and V2 are likely to auto-check to V3, so V3 jams and we're first up with no idea what V1/V2 have behind us if they didn't fold.

Right but we can flat call the remaining $65 or whatever it is from V3 and then V1/V2 are usually only continuing if they are super strong since they can't bluff V3 out of the pot.

If you flat the $65 on the flop, V1/V2 will probably call with any pair and any draw because if the called preflop then they will find the flop odds enticing.