Villain ($350): TAG player, late 20s/early 30s, plays relatively straightforward most of the time. Have seen him massive re-raise turn with second pair, though.

Hero ($250): Has played relatively tight so far, not many large showdowns

UTG, UTG+2, and MP limp, Hero (CO) limps with 5d9d, V limps, SB completes, BB checks.

[Sub-question: I know this is a wide limp. I do generally feel that at softer live games where you almost always get to see a flop if you limp, it’s +EV to limp with a lot of cards, but I’m open to being persuaded otherwise? I do get that it’s likely to put you into more difficult decisions post-flop, but I still feel like limping with a good chance at seeing a flop and playing fit or fold based on whether you smash the flop can be +EV in certain instances.]

Flop ($14): 9h6d5h

UTG leads out with $10, UTG+1 folds, MP calls, Hero raises to $45. Villain re-raises to $140. Folds to Hero.

What’s the best play here? Is this an easy fold, given that Villain’s re-raise range is probably 99, 66, 55, 96o/s, 95o/s, 65o/s? I think if we assume that, with no more information, Villain’s re-raise range also includes OESD, flush draws, and overpairs, then shoving might also be the right move. Open to your expertise on this one.

you know what we're gonna say: fold pre. a 9 high 3-gapper is WAAAY outside the range of hands that would be a limp here. You never flop a nut straight with this hand which is rather important when trying to play hands for implied odds. If it comes 876 you could be drawing dead to a chop for your whole stack.

I would prefer an iso-raise from the cutoff in general since that gives you a better chance to get the button to fold, so that should tighten your range since you won't be limping. I'd only consider limping if button was telegraphing fold. And even then, only with 97s. Pitch 96s and 95s.

As played pre: I dunno. If plopped into this flop situation, I'd probably sigh and jam all in, but may depend what type of UTG range this guy limps with. It could be that he has AA/KK here or it could be he always has a set/straight. Don't mind folding.

this is the problem with playing in these limped pots like this, its hard to narrow your opponents ranges, V is on the button right? so he could be limping fairly wide here but id hope that he would open his button with 10's+ so unlikely you are up against an over pair, you think he has OESD's in his range ? idk about that (34 is the only hand); I think its ok to limp sometimes to see a flop but with a stronger range with hands like k9s being at the bottom of the range for example but you have to be confident in your post flop skills if you do, I think he could def have some heart draws in his range, the question is do you put 9x combos in his range? If so then shove otherwise its close

Oh, I thought it was UTG who bet/3-bet.

Since it's a third player putting in the 3-bet on the flop, I think we can safely fold.

I'm a fan of limping behind also but 95s is way too wide. When you not looking at an ace or face card limit yourself to one gappers. Two gappers you can use for squeezing occasionally if you have enough FE.

What to do on the flop is fold. You forgot 87 in villain's raising range, which makes a lot of hands that have you crushed but flush draws have a reasonable chance of beating you. Over pairs likely raise preflop. The only OESD is 43 and that isn't exactly a hand for getting aggressive. You have to put a lot of flush draws in villain's range before shoving is a good idea.

Notice also that having button make the 3 bet is much stronger. He is raising 2 opponents, either of which might have a very strong hand.

87 or set of 6s both make a lot of sense given the flush draw (and you block 9s and 5s). He can also represent those and other hands, of course. Seems like a fold here and the adage "don't go broke in a limped pot" rings true.

This isn't one of those circumstances. Indeed, you "smashed" the flop with top and bottom pair, and you may still have to fold.

"Fit or fold" is often a fine plan for small PPs, not crappy, suited 3-gappers.

Thanks, all. This is really helpful--looks like it's uncontroversial that I'll have to narrow my limping range.