I agree with you, that makes sense too. because every person has a different financial situation, and in my opinion this also depends on the gambler's approach to gambling, because even though their finances are bad, if they have a strong approach to gambling because they are chronically addicted then they will gamble even though They don't have good finances, but if they are seriously addicted then it is very likely that they will force themselves to continue gambling by doing anything that can make money for gambling.
That's true, indeed gambling will only end with two possibilities, namely winning or losing, but in my opinion what will happen more often is that the end of gambling is losing. We have to be aware of that, because it's true what you said is that the possibility cannot be guaranteed in the end, but with gambling the only thing that can be guaranteed is defeat.
Good point, we'll leave aside the rich or poor bit and it's true that it all still depends on how they approach gambling, if it's basically as you say that they have a strong ambition and enthusiasm for gambling along with some addictive mindset then it doesn't matter if they're poor they're still going to treat gambling with an aggressive approach, and the point is rich or poor if you have the wrong approach to gambling then obviously the rich are going to be poor and the poor might sacrifice their lives just for one spin based on luck.
One of the reasons why losses are more common than wins is because casinos apply a larger percentage of losses than wins, and I think it's a natural thing because after all this is a business for casinos which as we often hear that overall wins are actually only for the casino itself in the long run, and gamblers only get occasional wins that come by "chance" and also those that depend on luck, this is the reason why you can lose more if you basically put seriousness because all wins are nothing more than "possibilities".
Both responsible and irresponsible gamblers consist of high and low rollers. No cheap gambler, gamers can't be tagged poor, it's better called low rollers, as we can't determine for sure who's poor, indeed. A rich player can decide to be a low roller and a poor high roller. That is gambling above his income. Hence, the attitudes of these sets of people must differ, gamblers who are irresponsible have the same behavior regardless of their financial status, same as the irresponsible players. We all know what happens when one chooses to be irresponsible in gambling. If he's rich, he could end up poor as you said. Risk in this context means who gambles with a huge amount of money. A poor person can't afford to wager a huge amount, but what makes him a high roller, can be a low rolling for a rich player.
So, the risk for a person who doesn't possess lots of money could be going the extra mile by borrowing, illegal businesses, to raise money for gambling. However, trying to match this context of reason can be difficult in terms of behavior and type of gambler. Looking at the perspective of a rich player who chasing losses, is he actually in need of the money or addicted to the behavior? He's rich and may not be seriously on the lookout for more, to the extent of chasing losses. He could wager a huge amount and wait for another time to gamble. Unless he wants to go broke, then chasing losses while wagering huge amounts will take him there. Gambling is a risk for everyone, and the amount we wager doesn't define whether we are rich or poor in real life.