Gambling success depends on so many factors which isn't concerned with the way you describe the winners, Victor. Being a successful gambler doesn't mean the player has to win every single moment he gambles. Most time they still lose money, but have a way of dealing with risks. When a gambler is successful he has nothing to do with addiction. If he gets addicted then he is not successful in gambling. Those who appear as successful gamblers like in any other department, are the gamblers who issue advice on gambling addiction and also lecture other gamblers on different strategies needed to bypass too many risk factors in gambling. They're mostly authors and also go on tour with some TV shows that ask them gambling questions. Most of them are famous for winning at a certain time big prizes through gambling.
-snip-
I was surprised reading your post, it clearly shows that you didn't get the gist I narrated in what you replied to. I can't be so daft to say that gamblers can be winning all their bets, how? Are they some kind of gods? No No. Consistent winning is different from winning every bet, it only means that the gambler has more winning than losing periodically, and it depends on how you will now define that period. As for the subject itself, what I was trying to establish is that both winners and losers can be addicted to gambling, but for the fact that the addiction of the losers is negative to them and the people around them, they and people get to be discouraged and stigmatised respectively. This is why they look down on them and are finding mean to be cured of this addiction because it is rather wasting their money and there is no hope for them to gain.
Such people are being related to gambling addiction alone just because it's negative for them, but it's not so. Gambling addicts also include those who are gambling and gaining consistently, which includes those who can't do without gambling even as they do it for fun. If these last two categories continue to gamble and do not abuse it, they are fine with it as it is positive to them (earning and fun). The first category gets to make money consistently in gambling and loves to gamble every day and places it as a priority over any other thing. Is that not an addiction?
Even if the second category that loves to gamble for fun takes it as the sole or main hobby and prioritises it more than anything else and does it every time, is that not an addiction as well? But because it doesn't negatively affect their lifestyle, people often don't talk about the positive addiction. You can see that it's for the obvious reason people are silent about the positive addicts, but indeed they are addicts too, but the addicts that do not call for a concern (positive).
No, that's not addiction, and you made some misconceptions in your words narrative about those in the second category. First, you said they can't do without gambling, yes, it's addiction. In the bold section of the narrative you changed the wording, and with that narrative, the player shouldn't be considered an addict for enjoying gambling and consistently gambling. In your last lines, you still repeated the same mistake which I'd want you to remove from your mindset. They've never been a positive addiction. Addiction can also be called problem gambling. Are you saying mental illness is positive? Whenever a person is addicted to anything they can't be in control of what they're doing. The results of their actions would be negative at all times. Don't get it twisted, the addicts can win at some point, but it doesn't at any point make addiction positive.
Other than that because a gambler who still is under control of their gambling habit, but only loves participating in gambling every day doesn't make him an addict. Addiction is addiction and it can only be negative for a person to be addicted to anything, drugs, gambling, etc. Would you also say that there is a positive side to drug addiction because the person still makes money as an addict? You know quite well that the addicted gambler after winning would still waste the money in gambling. Then he'll have to battle with his mental disorder, which could lead to a more severe problem in the life of the gambler. Instead of calling such gamblers addicts, the best name allocated to them is responsible gamblers. They're not compulsive gamblers, like I said earlier, they can still go months without gambling. Because they do it for fun and participate every day doesn't make any changes in their mental health. That's why people tend to respect them, as they don't misbehave, rather they paint a good name to the act of gambling. Addiction has no positivity.