The Gambler’s Fallacy: Math Behind “Being Due”

Every gambler has this experience. A string of reds at the roulette wheel. A run of ten dead spins at the pokie. The thought emerges effortlessly: “Black is up now,” or “the pokie owes me now.” It seems logical.

The notion of owing a result after a streak has come to be known as the Gambler’s Fallacy. It’s a combination of misunderstood math, emotions, and the burning need to return to even. If the gambler is of legal age and they play at licensed internet casinos, then comparison sites like dashtickets.nz can assist in making those choices safer, but it’s the recognition of this fallacy that can truly shift how risk is handled.

The following is a concrete explanation of how “being due” thinking patterns work, how games forget past outcomes, and how one can identify these issues before draining a bankroll.

Why “Being Due” Feels So Convincing

Gambler’s Fallacy states that if something occurs more frequently than expected, it will happen less often the next time. A famous example: after a coin lands on heads five consecutive times, people feel the next outcome is more likely to be tails, although the chance on the next flip is still 50/50.

At the tables, this same reasoning continues with sequences of red numbers in roulette, followed by a sequence of losing hands and/or dead spins. The human brain is uncomfortable with streaks and seeks uniformity; it believes the game itself is trying to compensate. After a sequence of losses, it is hard to emotionally tolerate the fact that another spin is just as perilous as the last one.

Independent Events: Roulette Ball Doesn’t Have a Memory

Casino games are based on independent trials for the most part. This implies one action does not affect the outcome of the following action. The case of roulette is as clear as it gets. It is the same wheel every time.

A string of ten landings on red seems fishy, but each spin remains an independent event. The probability of landing on red on spin number eleven is just like on spin number one. The wheel does not have any memory that enables it to change its probabilities; it just spins again. The longer the streak from a single starting point, the less likely it is, but with spins measured in thousands, unlikely patterns will appear somewhere.

This independence is also true of the probability of a fair dice roll and a properly shuffled deck of cards. A game with independent rounds never needs to “compensate” for any given play, no matter how unlucky it feels.

Pokies, RNGs, and The Hot and Cold Machine Legend

Pokies add another complexity because all the actions occur within a computer program. Online slot machines rely on RNGs, which generate a series of numbers all the time. When you start a spin, the machine picks the latest figure, which corresponds to positions on the reels.

It does not keep track of whether you are on an upswing or a downswing, or the number of bonuses you have won that day. Each game is merely another draw from this random number generator. This explains why down times can drag on longer than one would imagine, or why one winning streak can follow another right after it. The game is not warming up or cooling off; it is just following its mathematics.

If you are interested in the mechanics of this independence, there is a resource that offers in-depth strategies on how to win at online pokies which goes into detail on RNGs, pay tables and what the player can actually control. While strategy can influence the speed of money loss, the slot machine will never recall previous winnings.

RTP, House Edge, and Why Streaks Don’t Make You “Due”

Return to Player, or RTP, introduces an additional layer of complexity. “96% RTP” often gives the player a sense that “I should get most of this money back.” That is not a guarantee.

RTP is essentially an average based on massive numbers of turns for all players. It is associated with the house edge that makes casinos financially successful. Within a single gaming session, outcomes can be much higher or lower than the stated RTP and still remain within expectations. A negative session does not mean that the game has reserved an eventual victory for your benefit.

A good primer on what RTP is in a casino will demonstrate the connection between RTP, edge, and long-distance play. In short, a long streak of losses doesn’t give you better chances of winning on the next play, and a streak of winnings doesn’t mean the game will “take it back” to level out.

How The Fallacy Occurs in Real-Play Situations

At the tables, “being due” rarely shows up as a formal belief; it shows up in how bets change. One version is raising stakes just because “it can’t miss again” after a few losses. Another is chasing a roulette number because “it hasn’t come up all night.”

This bias also appears online, in slot events and jackpots. If a player sees a prize that hasn’t been won for a long time, it is tempting to assume the slot machine “has been primed” and their spins carry extra value. On casino sites that run regular tournaments and slot events – like those listed in best online pokies – it is easy to slide from “fun promotion” into “this one’s got to be ending soon.

The risk is not taking part in these formats. The risk is adjusting betting amounts and playing time based on an imagined internal clock, rather than on what the player can realistically afford to wager.

Spotting “Being Due” Thinking in Yourself

The Gambler’s Fallacy can be deceiving because of its apparent logic. One way to spot it is to pay attention to your inner dialogue. When someone thinks “after that run, it has to hit” or “it can’t keep missing,” they are already making a flawed probability argument.

Another indicator is when you only increase stakes while losing. You may double or triple your stake to get back on track in one go. That urge is largely driven by the fallacy. You are treating the next spin as safer based on past outcomes rather than anything in the maths.

The selective nature of memory also plays a role. Big wins are remembered as “the machine finally paying out as it should,” while long periods of losing are dismissed as bad luck. In reality, both come from the same distribution. Recognising this makes it easier to walk away from a bad session, rather than hanging on for the imaginary “due” hit.

Turning The Maths Into Safer Gambling Habits

The importance of understanding this fallacy lies in its influence on behaviour. A key guideline is to apply the same rule to every bet as if it were your first of the day. If it is not something you would risk at the start, there is no reason to risk it at the tenth bet just because of a losing streak.

The next step is to set limits in terms of money and time, not “until it turns.” You decide your session budget and loss or time targets before starting and stop play as soon as you reach any of those, whether you are ahead or behind. The goal is to quit because your plan says so, not only after hitting a big feature.

If a more general framework is needed that links this to behaviour, guides on what responsible gambling is include lessons about chasing losses, expectations, and where to find help if gambling stops feeling under control. The Gambler’s Fallacy sits right in the middle of this, because the moment someone says they are “due,” they are usually already chasing.

This fallacy will not magically disappear just because you are now aware of it. The human brain looks for patterns; that is what it does. Every time you catch yourself thinking “it has to hit now” and correct it to “this outcome is just as random as the last one,” you shift a little control away from the game and back to yourself.

Last updated: 26/12/2025