It's just another phenomenon that gamblers often assumes that they have some control over the outcome of their bets especially if they have been doing it for a while even though every time is just purely random there's no skill involved. Take dice for an example we might assume that we can control and influence the result of it by throwing softer or harder or in anyway that our brain recognize a pattern and keep tells us it's a way to win the game. So let's discuss about it.
That's what we call,
Gambler's fallacy. Gamblers thought that there is a pattern that we, or we assume that we can see a pattern and so we are going to bet for example in baccarat game that Banker are going to win because it hit previously.
Gambler's fallacy is different, it's that gamblers believe that the previous set of results might impact the result of the upcoming event while this is the person believes that they can control the upcoming event's bet in their favor by assuming that they mastered the skill of playing the game even though in reality it just a coincidence that made them to believe in that way.
There are lot of posts that I want to reply but it's mot really interesting for anyone to see/read wall of text so I just leave it here and let you guys know about the existence of this misconception.