Flipping 5 tails in a row, it’s still a 50/50 chance to get a tail in the next flip?

Question

Flipping a tail is a 1/2 chance, but flipping 6 tails in a row is a 1/64, so if after flipping 5 tails, why is it incorrect to say that your chance of flipping another tail is now lower, like you’re “bound” to get a head? I know this is the gambler’s fallacy, but why is it a fallacy? I get that each coin flip is independent, but it feels right (as fallacies often do) that in consecutive flips the previous events matter? Please, help me see it in a different way.

In: Mathematics

Answer 1

I would like you to explain to me why you think this feels right? You clearly understand why the 50/50 chance is accurate. You explained it in your own post. To me it feels very wrong that the odds would be anything but 50/50, it would change my entire view of how the world works if that were not the case.