[Siegmund]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am burning with curiosity about how you train a neural net without feeding it historical information, though.

[/ QUOTE ]You cant. One of the biggest problems with nets is that you often need lots of data. What makes you think that we dont train it with historical data?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was quite sure you did. I was being a smartass - in reference to the comment that "you don't care about historical win/loss" when, in a sense, that is the ONLY thing a neural net cares about, since the network learns by strengthening the connections that lead to winning predictions and weakening the ones that lead to losing ones. (If you watched many tables, extending the idea of "winning" to be correctly guessing what should have been done at tables you only observed.)

Anyway, will be interested to see what comes of it, as well as interested in the more general question of whether a neural network method will outperform other methods attacking poker problems.