JHRainesJr
New Member
I have recently been learning (memorizing) BJ basic strategy. Obviously, to become proficient, involves many hours of practice. My thinking is that the foundation for advantage play is being able to play basic strategy near perfectly. To actually do that in a Casino environment while counting cards (also near perfectly if the player is to get a real advantage) the strategic play must be essentially automatic.
The key phrase in the above discussion is "NEAR PERFECT". Human beings are not machines and mistakes will be made. It has been estimated that for every five operations a human performs, there is an average of one error. Now a 20% error rate would be a disaster in executing a playing strategy but, even with many hours of practice, I believe that actual perfect play (i.e. - never making an error) is not possible for the vast majority of players.
At this point, my error rate is somewhere around 2%. I believe that with diligent practice I can get this rate to the 0.5% to 0.2% rate. I have become convinced however, that I probably will never get the rate to zero.
In playing situations, I observe that when making an error it does not always turn out badly. That is, all strategies are based on probabilities. So even if you chose the wrong play based on the strategy for one round, you may still win that particular round.
With that background, my question is this: has anyone done any calculations as to what effect human error rate in strategic play has on the expected outcome? Is there any nice rule of thumb measure that says for instance, for every 1% error rate in execution of the strategy, there is a -0.5 change in player expectations (or something like that)?
The key phrase in the above discussion is "NEAR PERFECT". Human beings are not machines and mistakes will be made. It has been estimated that for every five operations a human performs, there is an average of one error. Now a 20% error rate would be a disaster in executing a playing strategy but, even with many hours of practice, I believe that actual perfect play (i.e. - never making an error) is not possible for the vast majority of players.
At this point, my error rate is somewhere around 2%. I believe that with diligent practice I can get this rate to the 0.5% to 0.2% rate. I have become convinced however, that I probably will never get the rate to zero.
In playing situations, I observe that when making an error it does not always turn out badly. That is, all strategies are based on probabilities. So even if you chose the wrong play based on the strategy for one round, you may still win that particular round.
With that background, my question is this: has anyone done any calculations as to what effect human error rate in strategic play has on the expected outcome? Is there any nice rule of thumb measure that says for instance, for every 1% error rate in execution of the strategy, there is a -0.5 change in player expectations (or something like that)?
