@Caius Jard IMO, your comment would be a good answer.

Yes, I know that. I was just using SE jargon.

Why not just leave it as it is? The OP has some reasonable answers here. If the OP doesn't find any of the answers useful, I suggest he ask another question along the same lines, but being more specific on what he wants, and explaining why the answers here are not helpful. I haven't looked at Interpersonal Relationships in over a year, but I don't think the OP would get better answers there. I suggest the OP do some reading on Interpersonal Relationships to see if he is likely to get a better answer there.

Don't invest your life savings in ANY one thing.

@jamesqf Tell me how many cases of over 100 year chain marriages are known to you from your reading. I imagined it; did you?

@dwizum Just reflecting what exists. Also, if, repeat if, there is something in the chain marriage (thanks for the term, Rupert) that the IRS would look at askance, the participants would want to fly under the radar of potential informants. Note that the question is: Would the IRS care? I don't know everything that the IRS cares about!

+1, proving that it is hard to imagine anything stranger than real life.

@RonJohn Funny. Some of us get bored being inside.

There is a coin counting machine in my supermarket which does not charge any fee provided you donate the coins to charity.

+1 All too true. I suggest that you add to your answer: the first thing the OP should do is to find out if he can remain anonymous. Some jurisdictions and some lotteries allow the winners to be anonymous and some don't. If no one knows you have won the lottery, they cannot glom onto you for part of it.

Eat peanut butter sandwiches. Don't have any fun if it means paying for it. If paying off your credit card debt isn't painful, you will have learned nothing.

@Joe Taxpayer: (1) Thanks! and (2) I disagree that it is suitable for IPS. The OP asked a technical money question, and PF is attempting to answer that. Even I am keeping within the PF mandate by pointing out that people are not the rational actors (is this the right term?) that economists have long assumed. All this is way beyond IPS. The IPS question would ask "how do I explain my plan to my children to avoid hard feelings?" This may be the Q the OP should ask, but it is not the Q she asked.