Do you think people who are able to be disciplined and moderate their behaviors all the time have more free will than those who immediately give into every impulse? Why or why not?

When determining the idea of free will it seems to be a pretty black and white issue, either we have free will or we don't, but that said, wouldn't it make a little sense that someone who is always choosing to deny their impulses and choosing to do things that go against the flow where life is taking them would be exhibiting not precisely free will but more free will than someone who does not have this ability at all and simply does whatever comes into their head and goes with the flow all the time? I suppose you could say that if life is all predetermined then the person who chooses all the time sometimes irrationally is doing so within the framework of predetermination, but if that's the case why wouldn't they just accept the predetermined actions without the illusion of a choice? Why would they have this idea of choice in their mind at all? Why would one person have this idea of choosing where another might not at all? If the idea of free will is not being able to choose then someone who is randomly making choices between two paths must have some sort of free will compared to someone who will always go left, right?

To me it makes more sense that none of our actions on this planet matter at all so in a way we don't have free will even if we technically do just because when earth is gone none of what we did will make any bit of difference, is that part of the argument against free will?