I started playing for real money recently at Party, and have noticed I play pretty passive pre-flop (basically, lots of small calls to see flops, often with pretty marginal hands, the big hands I would raise with (QQ and better) don't come up often enough to offset my otherwise passive preflop activity). I have been playing .5/1 limit games mostly, full tables. It's woking fine for me, I'm up a little bit, and I tend to see alot of flops, but this stlye appears to go against the conventional wisdom.

I imagine more aggressive play is reccommended to avoid being pushed out on raises and losing a bunch of small calls bets, and to chase out flush/straight draws if you have a nice pair. However, betting in with something other then a big pair can end up being pretty disappointing when the flop comes up without getting a piece of it, especially if there are a couple overards. So why not pay the BB to see a few flops (most of the time in the games I have been in, a call of the BB gets you to the flop)? I was wondering if the math worked out so that calling with marginal hands (say 9To, A4o or 8Ts) to see flops just doesn't pay for itself in the long run?

(I've seen the thread discussing playing 32s, etc, which I thought was a great discussion of how different players can make different stlyes work).

Great forums, btw.