The gambler priority was only to avenge his losses earlier, afterall he recorded gigantic losses, in my opinion the betting agent has no idea although he made faults because he knows the risks involved in gambling and still supports someone to gamble after witnessing the gambler losing steadily. They're both at fault, before gambling, atleast know the amount of losses you can take in and never to be too desperate to bet on games, do take time and mapped our good strategy, and if it doesn't go as plan, leave it, tomorrow is another opportunity to try again.
The fact that the betting agent have fucked up by allowing the gamblers to bet and play games on credit make it look as if the agent already have a forhand understanding with the gambler before that incidence for him to have allow the gambler to acumulate such debts trying to cash up with his loses which landed him into a bigger debt.
So in a clear term of the are at fault aince one can not blame one and leaving out the other since it takes two to commit such crrime, but only the business owner will determine what becomes the ountcome6of both of them.since the agent already know that it will be hard for him to recover from such mistake of allowing the player to gamble on credit which is against the business policy of not credit no play or bets.