I haven't read that but I assume it goes along the lines of...

Gambler: "I already got five 6's. I can't possibly get another one. That's a statistical improbability!"

Wrong assumption: Past dice rolls affect future rolls where as dice rolls are independent. Its improbably to get six 6's in a row but GIVEN that you have 5 sixes, getting a sixth is just 1/6

Am I right?

There's also a reverse version with the same mistaken assumption.

Gambler: "I already got five 6's. I must be on a roll! I'll surely get another one."

The correct assumption to make in this case would be that the dice is loaded. Same decision, different reasoning.

Well, getting five 6's in a row is 1/7776 , so I suppose it is debatable if one could establish the dice are loaded from such a small sample set.

Hot hand fallacy