But the trick to winning the game is to have a claim that is "plausible" even it is wrong and the money to cowering the opponent. There's no looser pays rule.
In real life, a suit between neighbors Fred and George about damage caused by or to one or the others cow will likely end in an equitable decision. Nobody has any real money, so no Herculean battle occurs.
A suit between Microsoft and Google likely results in a stalemate.
A suit by an out of work laborer against an industrial giant is going to net millions to a law firm, and perhaps something to the worker or perhaps a class. This regardless of the facts of the case and who is right or wrong.
A suit by an industrial giant against someone small with some valuable item - perhaps a competing product - the deep pockets usually win. This is not to imply that all corporate lawyers are corrupt.
In the overall scheme in the USA the rules favor the rich, not the right.