- Verbally announce raise.
- Put in $40 to go with your $20 that is already out there. This calls the $60.
- Have the dealer pull the bets in.
- Put another $40 out there.
- Watch as the table erupts, since 4 or 5 of the other 9 players will start ranting that you can't raise this amount. They'll be wrong, but for some unknown reason it's 2011 and people are still completely unaware of raising rules in NL Holdem.
- Allow argument to ensue until people become hot under the collar, then have dealer confirm that you can in fact make it $100 after it went $20-to-$60.
- At this point, you're guaranteed either two callers plus one spite call with any decent hand when you shove the turn, or someone simply jams now because of all the flaring tempers.
- Profit !

Half kidding but I have actually used versions of this in 1/2. It's also fun when intoxicated (sorry EV life nits, I know alcohol ruins your winrate!) to make it $18 just to bust people's chops after the open is to $10

You played this hand well. You gave the Villain(s) an opportunity to make a mistake (call) and they didn't. That's life. It's a lot better than you making a mistake (too small bet) and losing your money.

Agree to what part and disagree to what part? I can not address that until I know what you agree with and what you don't.

I am very well aware if what you might be up against, but I am also aware that you flopped the joints, and are sitting on 130BB preflop. Your thinking should not be based how you are going to get outdrawn, rather how you are going to get all the chips in the middle.
If there was a FD on the board or we were sitting deeper (at least +200BB deep) I would be advocating raise raise raise like everybody else to build/to protect/to charge, but with our eff. stacks/ and the board as dry as it is, we have to plan around committment/doubling up not around how to avoid getting outdrawn.

Yes it is risky. It is a simple risk/reward issue, but we are risking only 130BB. If we were deeper, flatting the flop would not be the best line to take not only because of the risk but also because we need to start building the pot to extract maximum value.
With our eff. stack neither building nor protecting our hand is as important as when we are deep. We should be able to get max. value from our hands by the river if any of the V's have any reasonable holdings to continue with, and if we are not willing to risk our 130bb eff. stack with this hand and board, we are better off not playing these speculative hands in the first place.

I would lead on the turn for about 45%-55% of the pot to:
1) extract value from all sets /2 pair/ stubborn TP hands
2) to protect against/ charge draws giving them the wrong odds to chase
3) Induce from BUT if he is in the habit of continuing his flop aggression on later streets.
4) Give BB an opportunity to reraise if he is slowplaying a set.

Well you basically addressed my contentions with your post.

I definitely think flatting is a viable way to play the hand. Still not sold that it's better than raising but that's hard to determine.

I appreciate all the replies from everyone.

Pretty much /thread. We're OOP and any board pair sucks, as well as over cards depending on their holdings. Need to be IP to consider flatting, and our stack size is perfect for a $180/call or shove turns if flatted.