Small hands and Implied Odds?

I came across this info years back but can't remember where. I am trying to brush up a little on my math and poker.

It's regarding Deep Stacks (100bb+) and small hands like suited 1-2 gappers, even unsuited 1-2 gappers. The theory was basically that strong preflop hands like AA, KK, QQ, AK, etc lose value against small hands, the deeper the stacks are. Premiums win pots often, but small pots. Small hands lose most pots, but when win they win big.

Anyway, what I wanted to know was the implied odds preflop for these types of hands. For example, we know that set mining needs 7:1 pot odds to break even. Most players recommend for the villain to have at least 15x times of the bet/raise in his stack, to justify seeing the flop.

What are the implied odds we need with the small hands I mentioned. I think it was like 40x or 50 times the bet. I can't remember maybe I am completely off. Perhaps the best way would to look at frequencies of connecting with the flop.

No idea, never seen reference for that. Implied odds multiplier reference might be insufficient given small hands also include strong inverse implied component. However, given big blind can call those hands against open raise (if hero is good post flop), that would give 2bb call to win 100bb -> implied odds needed 50x out of position. IN position that would make around 33x-40x? if call would be safe on passive table.

Also many of the cases 3betting plan would be better probably, so those cases big part of the equation would be fold equity.

10 to 1 min for setmining.
20 to 1 min for SCs.
30 to 1 min for SGs.

Edit: sometimes we make exceptions for whatever reason, but generally speaking, avoid unsuited. Position is much better. We can control pot size better. Very tough to manage pot size OOP.

Thanks guys. I think it was Dan Harrington's Cash Game where I came across it. Not too sure...