What Is the Gambler’s Fallacy in Sports Betting?

Imagine your favorite NFL team has lost five games in a row. You tell yourself, “They’re due for a win next week.” After all, they can’t keep losing forever, right?

Or maybe you’ve flipped a coin and gotten tails five times straight – it feels like the next flip has to come up heads. This intuitive hunch that odds will “even out” in the short term is extremely common – and it’s exactly what the gambler’s fallacy is all about.

Understanding the Gambler’s Fallacy

The gambler’s fallacy (also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy) is the mistaken belief that if something happens more frequently than normal during a given period, it will happen less frequently in the future (or vice versa), as if random events have a built-in balancing force.

In plain terms, it’s thinking that past outcomes influence future outcomes in independent events, even when there’s no logical connection.

For example, let’s say a roulette wheel lands on black five times in a row. Someone succumbing to the gambler’s fallacy might bet on red next, convinced red is “due” because black hit so many times in succession.

In reality, the wheel has no memory – the probability of red vs. black on the next spin remains the same as always.

In fact, this fallacy got its nickname from a famous incident at Monte Carlo Casino in 1913, where the roulette ball landed on black 26 times in a row, and gamblers lost millions betting on red, wrongly assuming the streak had to flip.

The core idea of the gambler’s fallacy is that people expect short-term sequences to reflect long-term probabilities. If an outcome hasn’t happened in a while, we feel like it’s bound to happen next to “even things out.”

Conversely, if something has been happening a lot, we think it’s less likely to continue. This mindset ignores the reality that, for independent events, the past has no influence on the future.

Each game or flip is independent – a coin doesn’t “owe” you a heads after flipping tails five times in a row, and a sportsbook certainly doesn’t owe you a win after a losing streak.

In other words, don’t let your mind trick you into thinking an arbitrary streak means a change is imminent.

The Gambler’s Fallacy in Sports Betting: “Due for a Win” and Other Myths

So how does this fallacy show up in American sports betting? It pops up any time a bettor assumes a future outcome will be the opposite of a recent trend just because of that trend. Here are some common sports betting scenarios plagued by the gambler’s fallacy:

• “They’re due for a win” (Losing Streaks): Perhaps the most common example. A team has lost several games in a row, and bettors argue that the team can’t possibly keep losing. For instance, if the Kansas City Chiefs (a strong NFL team) lose a game, many fans will say “no way they lose two in a row.” It sounds reasonable – the Chiefs rarely drop back-to-back games – but by itself this is classic gambler’s fallacy thinking. The fact that they lost last week doesn’t magically improve their chances this week. A mediocre team that’s on a five-game skid has no cosmic guarantee to win the sixth; they might be more motivated, or the matchup might be easier, but those are actual factors. The mere existence of a losing streak doesn’t make a win any more likely in the next independent game.
• “They’re due for a loss” (Winning Streaks): The fallacy cuts both ways. If a team has won, say, 10 straight games, some bettors will start thinking the team is “overdue” for a loss. You might hear this when a dominant NBA team has been on a tear: Surely they can’t keep winning forever, someone’s gotta beat them soon. Again, unless there’s a tangible reason (like fatigue, tougher opponents coming up, injuries, etc.), assuming a loss just because of a long win streak is faulty logic. The team’s past string of wins doesn’t force a loss to happen. (In fact, blindly betting against streaks can be as misguided as blindly betting with streaks – both are errors if you’re basing it only on the streak and not real data.)
• Over/Under Streaks: Totals bettors fall for this one frequently. Imagine an MLB team’s last 7 games have all gone Under the projected run total. A gambler’s fallacy mindset would say, “The overs are due – this next game has to be high-scoring because the unders can’t keep hitting.” In reality, that team might just have strong pitching and weak hitting (or consistently low totals set by oddsmakers). There’s no law that says after 7 unders, the 8th game will suddenly go Over the total. Each matchup’s scoring is influenced by the pitchers, weather, lineups, etc., not by the previous games’ over/under results. The same goes for the reverse – a string of Overs doesn’t guarantee an Under is around the corner.
• Against the Spread (ATS) Runs: You’ll also hear bettors talk about a team covering or failing to cover the point spread multiple games in a row. “This team has covered the spread in seven straight games – they’re bound to miss next time,” or “That underdog hasn’t covered in weeks, they’re due to cover.” In truth, each game’s ability to cover the spread is roughly a 50/50 proposition (assuming the lines are well-set) and isn’t affected by the ATS outcome of previous games. A team that beat the spread seven times in a row has the same theoretical 50/50 shot to cover in the eighth game. Streaks end eventually, yes, but you can’t predict which game will break the pattern purely from the fact the streak exists.
• Player Slumps and Hot Hands: Sports fans often say things like “he’s due for a hit” when a baseball player is 0 for his last 15, or “he’s due to miss one” when a basketball player has made five three-pointers in a row. Be careful here – some of this ventures into related biases like the hot-hand fallacy, which is slightly different (believing a hot streak will continue). But the gambler’s fallacy perspective would be expecting a reversal – the slump must end with a hit soon, or the hot shooter must cool off on the next shot. While regression to the mean does happen over time (players won’t bat .000 forever, and even elite shooters eventually miss), there’s no strict “due” clock that makes the very next attempt more likely to break the pattern. Each at-bat or shot has its own factors (pitcher matchup, defense, player form that day, etc.). Just because a guy missed his last ten shots doesn’t magically increase the odds of making the next one – unless something concrete has changed in the situation or his technique.

As you can see, the gambler’s fallacy can creep into any sport or bet type. NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, college football/basketball – it’s always tempting to say “They just can’t keep losing (or winning or going under) at this rate.”

We’ve all felt that urge. In fact, sportsbooks know bettors think this way and sometimes shade lines accordingly.

For example, if a high-profile team has failed to cover the spread several games in a row, oddsmakers might post a slightly tougher line on their opponent, anticipating that casual bettors will back the team “due” to cover.

The key is recognizing these thoughts for what they are – a fallacy – before they influence your bets.

Why Do Bettors Fall for It? The Psychology Behind the Fallacy

If the gambler’s fallacy is so clearly wrong in hindsight, why do smart people (and even seasoned bettors) keep falling for it? The answer lies in our psychology.

Human brains are wired to look for patterns and make sense of randomness. We have a natural tendency to assume that random events should even out in the short run, reflecting the long-run averages.

Psychologists call this flawed intuition the “law of small numbers” – we expect a small sample of outcomes to be as balanced as a large sample would be.

In the long run, many things do regress to the mean. Flip a fair coin a million times, and you’ll get very close to 50% heads and 50% tails. But in the short run, wild streaks and lopsided splits are not only possible, they’re statistically expected from time to time.

Our minds struggle with that idea. After seeing an unusual streak – like six coin flips in a row all coming up heads – we instinctively feel that tails is now more likely, because six heads in a row “doesn’t feel right.”

In truth, the chance of heads or tails on flip #7 is still 50/50. The coin has no memory, but our brains can’t help searching for fairness and patterns where none exist.

This bias is deeply ingrained. In high-pressure betting situations, emotions amplify it.

If you’ve lost five bets in a row, hope and frustration mix together and whisper in your ear: “I’m due for a win, my luck has to change.” It feels comforting to think you’re on the verge of a turnaround.

Likewise, if you’ve been on a hot streak, you might get anxious and think “I’m bound to cool off soon” and start second-guessing bets that are actually good.

These are all mental tricks – cognitive illusions born from our desire to predict and control outcomes in an uncertain world. Recognizing that randomness gonna random (so to speak) is the first step to overcoming the gambler’s fallacy.

How to Recognize and Avoid the Gambler’s Fallacy

The gambler’s fallacy can be sneaky, but there are ways to guard against it when you’re betting on sports. Here are some tips to recognize and avoid falling into this trap:

• Catch the “Due” Thinking: Pay attention to your inner monologue when you analyze a bet. Are you using words like “due,” “bound to,” or “can’t keep (winning/losing)” as justification? If you hear yourself saying, “This team is due for XYZ because of their recent results,” that’s a red flag. Simply being “due” is not a valid reason to bet on something.
• Treat Each Game as Independent: Remind yourself that each matchup is its own event. Today’s game doesn’t care about yesterday’s outcome. A team might be emotionally affected by a streak (players can gain confidence from wins or feel pressure after losses), but those factors are different from the mystical idea of being ‘due’. When handicapping, focus on tangible factors – talent, injuries, matchups, weather, scheduling – rather than an urge to bet purely on a streak ending. “They lost last week so they should win this week” should not be part of your handicap.
• Look for Real Reasons, Not Just Streaks: If you believe a streak will end, be able to point to why beyond “it’s gone on long enough.” Maybe a star player is returning from injury (boosting a losing team’s chances to finally win), or a baseball team that’s been in a scoring slump is facing a notoriously bad pitcher tonight (making an offensive breakout more likely). Those are concrete reasons. “They haven’t hit an over in 7 games, so it’s due” is not a concrete reason – it’s the gambler’s fallacy talking.
• Understand Law of Averages vs. Short-Term Variance: Educate yourself on the difference between long-term probabilities and short-term variance. Yes, over many trials outcomes tend to align with their probabilities (the law of large numbers). But in the short run, variance can and will deviate from the average in streaky ways. Knowing this intellectually helps you stay calm during streaks. A run of bad luck doesn’t mean you’re closer to a win on the next bet – and a hot streak doesn’t mean a crash is right around the corner. Each new wager still has its same probabilities. Embrace that uncertainty rather than fighting it.
• Stay Disciplined and Don’t Chase: The gambler’s fallacy often tempts people into chasing losses. For example, upping your bet size after a losing streak because you feel “a win is due” is a recipe for disaster. Stick to a consistent strategy and bankroll management plan regardless of recent outcomes. If you find yourself thinking “I have to get it all back because I’m bound to win soon,” take a step back. That’s the fallacy talking, and it can lead to bigger losses. Similarly, don’t start fading a winning team just because “their luck will turn” if all other indicators say that team is still in a good spot to win. Keep your emotions and knee-jerk “due” impulses in check.
• Use Statistics and Evidence: Whenever possible, ground your bets in data. If a trend is tempting you, look up relevant stats. Maybe a team has lost five in a row, but if those were all against top competition and now they’re facing a weaker opponent, that’s a valid angle (strength of schedule). On the other hand, if a basketball player has missed 10 free throws in a row, remember that if he’s a 75% free-throw shooter historically, the odds of his next free throw are still 75% – not higher – regardless of the streak. Trust the larger sample size (his true skill level) more than the recent aberration. Facts and stats act as an antidote to the fuzzy “I feel it’s due” logic.

By following these tips, you can develop the habit of thinking long-term and rationally instead of reacting to short-term streaks. The best sports bettors approach each pick with a clear head and an analytical eye – they know “streaks happen” but don’t try to time the streaks just by gut feel. Adopting that mindset will save you from a lot of painful “I thought they were due!” moments.

Quick Recap: Why “They’re Due” is a Fallacy

To summarize, the gambler’s fallacy is the false belief that past random outcomes influence future ones. In sports betting, it tricks us into feeling certain results are “due” simply because we haven’t seen them in a while.

This happens because our brains crave patterns and fairness, leading us to expect short-term results to balance out. It’s a psychological mirage – in reality, each game or play has its own independent outcome. The sooner you internalize that lesson, the less likely you’ll be to fall for the “due for a win” trap.

Bottom line: Avoid the gambler’s fallacy by treating each bet on its own merits. Don’t bet on a team just because they’ve lost a bunch in a row and are “due” to win, or avoid a bet just because a streak might end.

Instead, make your decisions based on sound handicapping and evidence. Streaks will end when they end – but only in hindsight will you know when.

By respecting the randomness of short-term results, you’ll make smarter bets and keep a level head through the inevitable ups and downs of sports betting.