[dinghovery]

Just wondering - has anyone conducted a Limit poker tournament (timed) where the top money positions win prizes, vs having a no-limit tournament where everyone goes out until one person remains?

I suppose with a Limit tournament, you could choose to raise blinds or not. Probably a good idea to raise blinds. But with a limit tournament, you might not have as many people lose all of their money.

Thoughts?

[BigWoody]

If you're looking to give people more bang for their buck, then the best thing for you would be a limit cash game. In any tournament, be it NLHE or LHE, the blinds/limits are raised and there is always a single winner, last person remaining. If you wanna run a limit tourney you will still raise the limits until there is 1 winner just like a no limit tourney... it will just take a little longer for people to bust out.

[ink_junkie]

Yep, Big Woody hit it on the head. Check out the WSOP events and you'll find a more than a few limit events. Same deal as no limit in terms of blinds, just takes longer to get to the end. If you host a tourney, I think you'll find the vast majority of the players (I'd guess up near 90%) will prefer a NL format. You can always go Pot Limit if you want to find something in the middle.

[Colquhoun]

Originally Posted by ink_junkie

Same deal as no limit in terms of blinds, just takes longer to get to the end.

I'm sure they take no longer to run, simply because the blinds raise according to the same time schedule. The only difference is that more PLAYERS last longer. I play a bunch of limit tourneys online, and the early stages are a bit boring, but in the end, the blinds get so high that it plays more like NL than you would imagine. The online limit ones also play about the same amount of time as NL tourneys. Unless your home game has a few guys that go "in the tank" a little too often......

[dad604]

I have also seem tourneys where they start with fix limit but at a certain point, it becomes NL.