So Ive noticed i have alot of trouble playing these type of hands were your OOP getting amazing odds
to call with a pretty hand 'til you flop TPWK, Call a 5way cbet (thinking im often behind fwiw), turn a draw, Brick. Get Stacked.

Can i fold at some time during this hand?

Im really confused on what to do on the turn. I turn some nice equity but he
barrels two streets, flop 5 ways. I was pretty sure i was beat but folding felt way too weak.
I only had 46 hands on this guy with him running like 38/11 with an AF of 2.3 so he wasnt all that passive post even tho lol sample size

I would just call again on the turn.

Primarily you have second pair, weak kicker - i.e. showdown value. The draws are secondary to that (though they give you immediate odds against some hands that beat you). You're not getting him off a queen and JT could hero-call. If you just call you can pick up value from bluffs on the river (check-call again) that you fold out by raising.

You could fold this pre as well.

I would fold on the flop cause i think most people either have a better ten or a set when they bet in this spot and we dont have enough hands on vilain to think the contrary

^ if the original raiser has already checked, and people's range to call this bet is JT or better (and maybe 54, or A5 if you are feeling frisky) then CO can do this with any two cards. He only needs to get it through 27% of the time and you can't have overpairs, how often does someone have a set here?

Therefore in equilibrium he should be wider than you say, therefore people should call wider than you say unless there are specfic reads.

I like leading flop here.

Explore why.

Fold or jam pre?
Just call leaves you exposed to BB getting it in.
Looks like a great squeeze spot with a heap of dead money out there and good stack sizes all round to pull it off...potentially. CO would need to be strong to call this off with stacks covering him behind.
Once you have hit top pair it is going to be difficult to avoid going the distance and maybe a lead does work in this instance.
a good example of why to fold this pre in this position - you have hit top pair but still unsure how to continue being oop .

your thought are right. We end up in a really wierd spots in the turn when V bet this 5 ways pot.
On the turn I find It hard to fold, but like Lekor said you have bluffcatching and some equity.
If V bet river I think we can ez fold saving 12bb (And make on Rebuy instead of 2)

I like the jam pre from Kurt even if I would not do that.But find the idea great

Pre jam's good. It goes multi-way, equity's pretty decent for T-hi, suited is purty etc.

I don't really get why we would lead flop, don't we just get called by better and fold worse? It's true that we fold out a load of 6 outers that could outdraw us, but if we are basically thinking we can get everyone to fold then our bluff range can include pure bluffs here, we don't need to lead this. It's true they can have lower pocket pairs that may peel one street.

k, let's simplify this. Lead flop with ~500-550 with a binary option: Shut down to flop raise or if flatted, cram turns (but not all turn cards, include a few scare cards...)

Hypothetical flop/turn playout: You lead flop, get 2 calls, including the 6 outer peel you mention 'cause it's a T hi board, you're 3-way with turn and the peeler has a Q etc.

Suddenly a calldown line turns into an equity tree with at least one possible caller with tons of outs or both folding, bumping your equity up to an overall +EV line for an aggressive OOP line.

I think jamming pre is fine, although I would play it more passively here. If we had a bit less BBs, I would probably jam it though.

As played, I think calling turn is a better idea. You have decent odds and can catch bluffs on the river indeed.

i understand what you are saying but i think you are wrong:

1) from vilain prospective he cant bluff 100% of the time with air and show immediate profit cause, even if we assume that the preflop raiser doesnt have a better ten or a set, there are 3 other players and they will have a ten or set over 27% of the time. So even if i follow your logic he cant be bluffing as much as you are saying.

2) trying to be unexploitable or play equilibrium in small stakes tournament wont be the most profitable thing to do.

3) your logic would be wright if we were on the river with a capped range and our opponent had a polarized one, but we are on the flop and ranges are different so you cant simplify the situation like that and come up with an equilibrium/gto solution easily