I am beginning to think that the only time a gambler gambles for fun is only when he gambles with what he can afford to lose. In this case, a gambler has $10,000 as his savings, and he gambles with $1000 down, he or she won't feel sad when they lose it (it means they gambled for fun). But if a gambler who has the same $10,000 gambles for above $5,000, and he loses all of them, the gambler won't be happy about his actions, and it might result in chasing of losses (which means he didn't gamble for fun). It means that both those that say they aren't gambling for fun sometimes gamble for fun, mostly when they risk an amount they can afford to lose. The actual time you gamble for fun is when you risk what you can afford to lose and not when you say you want to gamble for fun. However, a gambler might say he will gamble for fun and still end up not gambling for fun when he starts gambling. One can know a responsible gambler if he starts gambling.
Do we have many gamblers like this who can afford to lose 10% of their savings? When you say savings, you mean something you save for emergencies and rainy days. It will hurt when the time comes to use those savings, and you remember losing 10% of it in gambling.
I cannot afford to lose my savings in gambling. When you say money that you can afford to lose, it could come from excess money from your salary after you allocate it for savings. If you gamble a portion of your savings, then something is wrong with how you gamble.