That's not what I meant, Alan. Sorry I was not completely clear. I meant logical obligation, not legal obligation.
He's not legally obligated, but trying to define his winnings as recreational in nature given his logs and history would result in scrutiny similar to when those idiots put water in ping pong balls in Pittsburgh for the lottery. You can't just win and win and win under the explanation of "recreational" and not expect to draw all kinds of attention that is worse in nature than if you called yourself a professional.





Reply With Quote