Not actually true, except if the developers, instead of using a pseudo-random generator algorithm (which should be used in order to be allowed to post rationale outcomes like the game does), they used a different way to calculate the outcomes.
What I was trying to say is slightly different. Think about having a dice game, and you win the game rolling 6 and lose if you roll 1-5. With this assumption you should have 1 chance of 6 to win.
If the dice is an actual dice, than you have an actual random so you have actually 1 chance around 6 to toss a 6.
But if the dice is a virtual one (an application with roll the dice) than a pseudo-randomization is involved. Even if the algorithm tries to reproduce, as near as possible, the chance ration, actually you can have situations where the actual chance ratio, instead of 1/6 could become higher or lower at certain condition.
However pseudo-randomization tries to roll a 6 in a global range of 1 chance of 6 (in a long chain of rolls) as near as possible… so you can be considered “lucky” if you rolled the winning 6.
Different case if the outcomes are not the direct result of a pseudo-randomization algorithm, but was pre-determined using different logics. That case, yeah, you could be completely right.
However no one of us actually knows how the outcomes are calculated, so we can do only speculations