No, it's not a gambler's fallacy. You know you got zero this year, it already happened. You know it's expected 1/n next year (assuming independence, etc), just

No, it's not a gambler's fallacy. You know you got zero this year, it already happened. You know it's expected 1/n next year (assuming independence, etc), just like every year. So the expected amount of hurricanes next year is more than what you did get this year, which was 0. In total you now (as of now, year 1 end) expect only 0 + 1/n total hurricanes over the two years (this year and next). That is 1/2n per year: less that you would have predicted at the start of this year, which would have been 2/n over two years for 1/n per year. A gambler's fallacy is thinking getting 0 this year means it's more likely than 1/n next year to act to retroactively "correct" 0 this year.