Is this a leak?

Maybe you've been in this kind of situation before. You're in a pretty loose-passive live game, where pots are rarely raised preflop because raises don't seem to scare out much. The table's player quality is more or less a mixed bag -- two complete fish, a solid player maybe, two regulars and a few home-game champs looking for a good time. So it's evident early on that you're the best player at the table. You win some nice-sized pots early on by raising before the flop, getting several callers, then betting big on the flop and having everyone fold. You've quadrupled your buy-in in less than an hour by doing this.

If you're a strong player, you should be salivating at this scenario.

So eventually this hand comes along, or a few like it at your $1-2 no limit table. You're sitting on a stack of $200 (buy-in is insanely low -- capped at $50) on the button and you look down at 9-4 suited. Four players limp in before you, and a quick sidelong glance at the blinds tells you it's safe to just call. The small blind already has a single $1 chip in hand, ready to go, and the big blind is looking like he can't check fast enough.

Putting in your $2 looks very tempting. The pot is laying very nice immediate pot odds, and the implied odds if you connect solidly with the flop could be quite substantial indeed.

But what about when you miss the flop, or you flop a vulnerable pair (like if 9 is top pair on a rainbow flop or the flop is 2-3-4)? If you flop a flush or flush draw, what are the chances that you will be dominated by a bigger flush draw? What if you flop bottom two? The reverse implied odds are ugly on these scenarios. These problem hands that hit part of the flop can end up costing a lot more than they should.

So basically I'm posting this question because I'm not really sure. I've been playing these hands by ear -- since the games are so loose-passive I can afford to see the flops and turn them my way later on. I've been calling more from late position after seeing a few people limp. But is it worth all those blinds that I've paid only to see a disappointing flop? Is it worth it to take the worst of it when I connect? Granted, I usually get paid off big when I hit those boards hard. But I either lose a little here and there or a lot all at once depending on the board.

My results have been something like this (I'm guestimating, as I can't perfectly track every hand played in casinos): If I play for two hours and win 12 pots of 25BB or more, maybe 1 was won by coming from behind after limping in. The other 11 came from raising with big, paired, suited, and/or connected cards and making hands decent enough to continuation bet.

As a general rule, what do people think about making a bunch of small preflop calls when I don't expect to have much to show down? I'm still ending the sessions a winner. But am I costing myself small fortunes by carelessly throwing in a blind here and there when the pot odds are right? It pains me to think, sometimes, what those semi-donktastic calls are costing me. If I make five such calls in a row, at the $1-2 game that's $10. So say the next hand I get pocket aces and I am fortunate enough to get it all in three-handed before the flop. Also assume my rockets held up. So bleeding off that $10 cost me another $20, because I wasn't able to triple it up when I had a decent hand.

What are y'all's thoughts on this? I think I've become good enough at post flop play (at least against the marks at the Hustler) that it's good for me to see a lot of flops. But am I just giving my excuse to be loose -- which is my natural tendency? Is this a leak in my game, preventing me from soaring to the poker heights where I belong?

Feed[back] me.