Absolutely true, trading IS gambling in that you are putting money on an UNCERTAIN future. Whether automated or discretionary, it is a game of probability, pure and simple.

Top poker players and blackjack card counters are gambling and they are increasing the size of their bets according to when the odds/probability ARE in their favor much like when a high PROBABILITY setup calls for you to throw in your digital chips and roll the dice (hopefully loaded in your favor;-)

OK, it has come in 20 ticks, let's put them back on again with that 20 ticks price improvement. Surely, it doesn't take much of an analysis to see that today's bottom to top CL move of just over 200 ticks had within it an easy 900 ticks of potential production, short here, cover there, reverse entire position, etc.

Here I lost you. On one hand you say that its a game of probabilities, but then you say that each day is different and you trade different because of it.
As I see it or you are very good statistician and can calculate probabilities in more sophisticated manor than I can, or you call a strategy (setup) your entry criteria, and you draw your probabilities from your discretionary back performance.
For me a strategy/setup is a combination of entry point, stop loss and PT. Of course I try to test that my setup doesn't break if I change my stop or PT by a few ticks, but the same goes to my entries.
Unfortunately with my limited statistical knowledge I can get probabilities, on which I can relay, only from a complete setup.

Sure, it doesn't take much of an analysis, in hindsight, but to trade this way, in real time, is nearly impossible and I suspect only a few of the best can really do this on a consistent basis. That's based on nothing other than my own experience that trading is hard enough just to get into a position, and be able to hold that position for a profit, much less get out with a profit, reverse bias on the spot, take that profit, reverse again, and so on. It sounds so easy and looks so easy that you would have taken profit here, re-entered here, and on and on. As I said I know some people are successful at this, but what you are essentially describing is not only being right in a direction, but predicting turns in the market. No one can do this, not consistently anyway. Anyone who says they called a bottom or top over and over, market after market, is lying, plain and simple. It's too hard, and to think you can do it on anything other than sheer luck is to delude yourself, IMHO. Trading probabilities is one thing, to be an oracle in trading is to be a liar.

Poker shows cherry pick exciting hands and don't give you an idea of what it's like to play at that table.

What you are describing sounds like a "pump it or dump it" method of betting based on current hand strength.

In no limit, these people would be easy to shake out of a hand when weak and easy to limit losses against with when strong, because they are so easy to read.

Each flop, turn and river isn't a role of the dice because the percentages don't reset to a fixed ratio as the hand progresses.

LOL Trading is definitely difficult and sure, there are no oracles of trading, picking every bottom and top (unless you are fading my trades on some days;-)
I was merely trying to make the point that there is not only one correct way to trade, i.e. buy once and sell once.
It is also possible to buy at strong support, sell some at minor resistance, buy a bit more if it comes off that price, sell when it hits (and holds) minor resistance again or when it breaks through to next magnet resistance. The thread is about scaling in so I am putting forth a method which involves scaling in (after scaling out). For some people, it works. If something else works for you, that's good too