Final Table Takedown: Mark Herm Attacks the Final Table Bubble and a Heads-Up Bluffing Spot

Mark Herm has been a successful player on the online and live poker scene for many years. He is also well known as being a backer and a coach. In 2016 he coached November Niner Josh Beckley, who eventually took second in the main event.

Herm has more than $5 million in online winnings and $1.5 million in live cashes. This year he placed third at the WSOP $3,000 buy-in six-max event and won a $25,000 Aria high roller event for $270,000. Herm is the proud father of two-year old Luca “Tumbler” Herm.

Event: CPPT Venetian Deep Stack Extravaganza III
Players: 1,398
Entry: $1,600
First Prize: $310,114
Finish: 1st

Key Concepts: Instilling fear and pressure on the bubble: Bluff sizing.

Craig Tapscott: Set this hand up for us Mark.

Mark Herm: This hand is from the final table bubble, because I think the most interesting poker is played on that bubble. It even extends down to the final two or three tables because there is so much pressure to make the final table. I had started the day with about 3.6 million and had chipped up to about 4.5 million at this point.

Herm raises from the button to 90,000 holding 8 4.

MH: I opened the button with 8-4 offsuit as I had been opening most hands from that position. I don’t always open this hand, but I was chipleader on the final table bubble and the big blind was a weak player. The player in the small blind had won a European Poker Tour event, but I really didn’t know much about him or how he plays. He decided to…
Villain calls from the small blind.

Flop: J 9 3 (pot: 255,000)

Villain checks. Herm checks.

CT: Why didn’t you test the waters with a continuation bet?

MH: I decided to check back and probably give up on the hand.

CT: Why?

MH: Because I was winning so many hands by just opening. And I was willing to concede one here for a few reasons: 1. He could have been flatting me strong 2. I felt as though he could continue with his hand on this flop with a huge portion of his range (any pairs he flatted, any Q-10, J-10 sort of combos and even some ace highs that I don’t think would necessarily fold to my continuation bet. I didn’t feel I needed to start to play a big pot, as I generally don’t like to give up once I start firing. 3. I was glad he flatted me rather than three-betting. I don’t mind people flatting me and I am willing to concede pots to these people especially if they aren’t playing many pots.  

Turn: 3 (pot: 255,000)

Villain bets 125,000.

CT: Do you give up now?

MH: Well I just decided to rep a three and raise the turn and go all-in on the river. I wouldn’t normally do this except for the fact that it is the final table bubble. I just had the idea to do it intuitively in the moment.  

Herm raises to 285,000. Villain calls.

CT: When he called what was the hand range you were putting him on?

MH: (Laughs) I’m not really sure. For whatever reason I definitely didn’t think he held a huge hand. And for some reason I actually thought he could have really weak hands, but most likely just some sort of jack. I just liked the fact it was the final table bubble and I was going to be shoving the river for more than the pot. It’s just very hard for people to make big calls in spots like that, especially because not that many people make these kinds of bluffs.

CT: Was there any card that was a horrible card on the river that would change your plan to shove?

MH: Not many. A jack would be sickening though just because he’s obviously calling if he has a jack and it also makes my hand less believable.

River: Q (pot: 825,000)

Villain checks. Herm moves all-in. Villain folds. Herm wins the pot of 825,000.

CT: Well played. This seems like a spot where your experience gave you the freedom and confidence to make this move. What advice do you have for tournament players in regards to knowing how to take advantage of these types of spots, besides a decade of experience?

MH: I heard Phil Ivey say this on some WSOP coverage awhile ago. He talked about how the importance of paying attention as much as possible, because people give so much away. When I go deep in a tournament I’m really 100 percent focused on all the actions of hands; whether I’m involved or not in the hand. This is so underrated. I see people play sessions online while watching football in the background. I think it’s a big disadvantage. By just paying attention you can get into the flow and make the correct plays without even thinking. I think this is one of the biggest strong points of my game.

CT: I know from our talks in the past that you are a backer for many players. What do you believe a player should look for when choosing a backer?

MH: The problem here is that there’s not really an abundance of people with money in poker. So I would say if someone can find a backer that will give them money to play events that’s great. But ideally if you could find someone that would also serve as a coach, that would be above and beyond expectations. I first tell players looking for a backer to ask why. It’s almost always best to play with your own money and play lower stakes and have 100 percent of yourself. If a mid-stakes grinder is looking for someone to put them in the $100 rebuys, etc. (or big live buy-ins), the smarter move would be sticking to low-mid level events where they have a greater edge. This way they don’t give up any profits to a backer. There are obviously exceptions in really high stakes events, but generally speaking this holds true.

Key Concepts: Understanding heads-up play dynamics

CT: Set up the heads-up match.

MH: I was heads-up vs. Antoine who seemed to play well and seemed kind of loose. Since heads-up play had begun he had started to three-bet quite a lot. I dialed down my aggression and decided to take this to post flop play, which is actually not very standard for me. I wanted to lead a lot of flops vs. him and try to compensate for the standard thing that happens in raised pots where the opener continuation bets and wins.
Saout raised to 375,000. Herm calls holding J 3.

Flop: 9 7 6 (pot: 790,000)

Herm bets 275,000.

CT: Share a little more in detail the strategy for leading in this spot?

MH: We are heads-up playing no limit hold’em.

CT: I’ll need a little more than that.

MH: (Laughs) OK. It’s hard to make hands. I feel like this is a massive mistake rookies and even mid-level players make in the game. They overestimate how often they are going to make hands and over-fold or don’t fight enough for the pots neither player connects with. So I’m trying to be the one to take all of these pots where my opponent has nothing, so it requires me to do stuff like leading with nothing quite often.

Saout raises to 700,000.

CT: What are you thinking when he raises?

MH: I just thought given the dynamic it looked like I would lead a lot of flops. I think he picked up on that and decided to raise. And to be honest with you Craig, I wasn’t 100 percent sure it would work. But I thought there was a good chance.  
 
Herm raises to 2,250,000. Saout folds. Herm wins the pot of 1,765,000.

MH: He folded pretty quickly. That was definitely a confidence and momentum builder to have at the beginning of heads-up play.

CT: Share a few other pointers for solid heads-up strategy that many players may not be aware of?

MH: Bet and raise a lot. 

CT: You’re full of good stuff. It’s that easy, huh?

MH: Well like I said, it’s hard to make hands. Unless you’re playing someone that is a massive spew, it is going to be hard to play tight and win. Even if they are a spew it’s heads-up no limit hold’em and at the end of the tournament it’s never really deep enough to advocate a nitty approach. You need to win pots. But experience definitely helps a lot in understanding how to play when you have nothing.

CT: Can you share perhaps the most important thing you’ve learned coaching that has improved your game?

MH: What has improved my game is seeing spots where people get jammed up often. Countless times I see a player in their head about their game and unaware of where their equity really comes from. For example, I’ll see a player want to hyper-analyze a river spot where it’s close between a call and a fold. When people ask me in those spots I generally respond with, ‘It doesn’t really matter.’ This may be hard to understand, but each of us as players can really only make the best possible decisions we are capable of in any given moment. Many times situations like this are simply close and we can only guess.

But hyper-analyzing these situations won’t make the decisions any more proficient. These same players also are more likely to fail to see the blatant leaks they have in their overall strategy, which includes things like hand opening and three-betting ranges. It might not be sexy to talk about opening the button with K-3 offsuit, but it’s probably way more important in understanding that than focusing on calling or folding in a close river spot. Honestly, overall experience is going to make those decisions easier. Be patient. It just takes time.

CT: Anything else?

MH: Well in poker there is a lot of theory and in my opinion close-minded thinking. I think the only way any of us to truly learn as a player is by experientially learning and experimenting. I have been guilty of having strict rules with myself in the past without really understanding why people suggested a certain strategy and in my experience that ‘follow the crowd’ sort of approach is not very good. If everyone is doing the same thing and playing by these ‘rules’ it cuts off our greatest tool as a player – intuition. So basically what I suggest to people is experiment, try stuff, and listen to your gut. If you try something, look stupid and mess up, then you’re probably on the right path. Any sort of mainstream thinking in my opinion is never going to lead to elite status as a player. ♠