If someone has already accepted their gambling addiction and managed to stop gambling, it is synonymous with willpower.
But the paradox is that if you have the strength and conviction to stop gambling, anyone could come to the conclusion: "Why not just control it and that's it, without needing to quit gambling completely?".
Which brings us to this questions:
Is it harder to control gambling or limit it without falling into excess than to stop gambling forever?
Why is the effective strategy not moderation but absolute abstinence?
For many people, it's not easy to control their own gambling habits and when they get addicted, they prefer to completely get rid of it because if they start again, they'll get addicted again. It's the pattern that causes addiction. When you place a bet, lose, then try to chase it. In overall, people who gamble for money, get addicted to gambling but for those, who gamble for fan, rarely develop addiction. So, since addicts are here for the money and not for the fun, they'll definitely fail in control of their gambling habit because the reason they gamble for, already looks addictive. Also, when someone has a past for developing an addiction, they'll more likely develop it again.