I'm not sure why you put the pure-luck-or-not aspect on par with the addictiveness. People can get addicted to winning, regardless of if it's due to their skills or just luck.
The problem with e.g. slot machines is that anyone can win, with the same odds, so it's easy to get addicted to it. You can't get addicted to winning at golf unless you're already putting the work to get good at it. With slot machines you can win, without doing any work. That's the catch.
> With slot machines you can win, without doing any work
Uh, this is the exact my point. With Poker you can win, without doing any work, for one hand or even one night. You can't win forever, but gamblers are not famous for their long-term thinking ability.
And I didn't put the pure-luck-or-not aspect on par with the addictiveness. Actually I opened this conversation with this:
> Is gambling's issue its addictiveness, or its luck-based nature?
It's the luck based nature. The addiction is because you have inconsistent results despite consistent inputs. Humans like to learn, problem solve and pattern seek. Luck based reward systems subvert that but random games tease that part of our brains that it is possible to figure out the pattern if we just do a few more experiments with inputs.
The problem with e.g. slot machines is that anyone can win, with the same odds, so it's easy to get addicted to it. You can't get addicted to winning at golf unless you're already putting the work to get good at it. With slot machines you can win, without doing any work. That's the catch.