Do you think about pot odds when deciding on suited hands?

Ring game, no limit. I'm on the button with a small ace suited - let's say A5. (On a brief tangent, I used to limp with this in most any position. I've come around to thinking that this is a pretty loose play, so I would generally fold this except in late position.) There's one early limper and then all folds to me. Only the blinds left to act. Do I limp in/raise/fold this hand? Here's my thought:

- This hand is no good unless I get the flush or flush draw. The top pair possibility is there, since most players have folded, so maybe my ace high is good, but I hate playing those weak ace pairs... more often than not it's a losing proposition.

- The odds are something like 12% to flop the flush, or a flush draw. That's roughly 8 to 1. Obviously I'm not getting anywhere near that pre-flop with so few limpers, and it gets worse if the small blind folds, or either blind raises. Implied odds are nice but I think those are better with more people in the pot. Again if only a few people play, my chance of getting someone to pay off the flush are not great. This is especially true at tables where people are acutely sensitive to the flush card coming out, which is a lot of them.

So my inclination is to fold this hand in that situation. What do you think? Also what do you think about it if there are no limpers at all, and if there are two or three limpers? (With no limpers I almost want to raise and just try to take the blinds with the ace as the probable best hand; with multiple limpers I'm guaranteed to limp and look for the flush. But how good do you want the pot odds to be before you do this?)

Maybe it's just me and aggression talking, but I'd probably try to steal the blinds in this scenario. But that would depend on any reads I had on them. Tight/Loose, patterns indicated a willingness to defend with any cards etc? If you are in a no-foldem kinda game this might not be such good plan.

As the number of limpers increases from zero, the more inclined I would be do play AXs (for any X) on the button, or from late position. However, if there was a raise and re-raise in front of me, and a few-to-no limpers, I'd be more inclined to get out of the way and let the raiser and re-raiser battle it out (Assuming that you feel their raising standards aren't too low i.e. they aren't loose raisers (again another 'read' type scenario.))

I agree, and I would probably fold. I hate Ax after the flop. If I go for the ace, he could have me kickerd; go for the x, he could have a pp; if Im going for the flush draw, only up against one limper and the blind. Doesnt seem worth it to me to call.

If he is LP he calls my raise and I am playing after the flop again, LA he goes after me and I have to decide how much I really like Ax, TP and he probably has you beat if he calls, TA and he probably isnt limping in from early position without a big hand. I dont like raising much either. I just hate Ax. Does anyone think I am off base here? if there were more limpers in ahead of me I would call, look for the flush/draw.

Isnt it traditional that it takes more to call an early limper than to make the first bet into the pot? dont remember where I read that.

I don't really care about pot odds, only when i have suited connectors, and when it's a limit game. Otherwise in NL,... I pay more attention to reads and bet patterns.

{This post has been removed}

On Axs, more limpers = better. Good if you flop the hotness (flush/draw, 2 pair, 3 of a kind, bicycle straight etc). All in all that's about 1/8. So to justify the call you need about 3-5 limpers, and at least 1 caller to a pot-sized bet after the flop when you hit your hand (this makes 8x your blinds). I wouldn't play this hand if it's folded to you.

More limpers in this situation.