Everyone is so amazed that he opened the safe “on the first try” but the article also says, “Like the Mills family, other museum visitors played around with try

Everyone is so amazed that he opened the safe “on the first try” but the article also says, “Like the Mills family, other museum visitors played around with trying to open it, with no success.“ Moreover the museum had had the safe since the mid 90s, at least 20 years... sounds like lots of tries by tourists... is it really so surprising that someone eventually opened it? Probably people don’t sit there all day, they try once or twice then let the next person have a go... so maybe 50% chance that the person that opened it would get it on their “first try”. (If not the article would have said “almost immediately” which would be nearly as newsworthy.) Sounds like the multiple comparisons fallacy. More-moreover, not unlikely there are multiple safes in public places like this in the world (I have seen at least one before in an antique shop that people would try like this) but this is the one that got opened and therefore written up in the news... sounds like survivorship bias.