Actually, he's not addressing compound probability.

Watch this video it very clearly illustrates why compound probability doesn't matter in independent events. The mistake you are making is known as the gambler's fallacy. The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the mistaken belief that if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, then it will happen less frequently in the future, or that if something happens less frequently than normal during some period, then it will happen more frequently in the future (presumably as a means of balancing nature). In situations where what is being observed is truly random (i.e. independent trials of a random process), this belief, though appealing to the human mind, is false. This fallacy can arise in many practical situations although it is most strongly associated with gambling where such mistakes are common among players. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy

While I understand the Monte Carlo fallacy, you can't truly say it applies, seeing as the randomization of other items are following less repetitive patterns. In the coming weeks, see how often it applies as a whole. Monte Carlo is more often used within chance rolls of 3, as in the initial set of conditions, but watch the following weeks wherein the same pattern continues.