[nevadaJACK]

Alright, I'm not all that dumb a guy, but this is something I've just never quite understood. Much ink has been spilled arguing about just what constitutes a "session" for the purposes of reporting one's poker winnings.

From what I've gathered, the most technically correct way to do it is to count each session individually (literally each time you get up from an online table counts as its own session), and you're supposed to sum the amounts from all your winning 'sessions' and list them as "other income", and sum the amount from your losing sessions and list that as an itemized deduction. Is that right so far?

Well fine, but I still don't get WHY it matters -- I mean, some people seem to just want to add up all their wins and losses for the entire year and report that as their income. And this, from what I gather, is a big no-no...? But just what's the difference whether I report a single +$30,000 NET from poker, as compared with whether I dutifully report $270,000 in winnings and then deduct my $240,000 in losses. Why won't you end up owing the same amount of tax at the end of the day in either case.

I'm sure there must be an easy answer to this, and appreciate your tolerance in answering.