The belief in deterministic luck is considered to be one of the factors contributing to maintenance of gambling behavior. This belief was found to be stronger during the gamble situation in problematic gamblers than non-problematic. The present study deals with the difference in luck attribution between the Czech gamblers and the control group. The main goal was to find out whether the difference between belief in luck is also present in non-gamble situation. A questionnaire containing the Belief in luck and luckiness scale and 14 stories of uncontrollable events was administered to 30 pathological gamblers and 30 matched participant (by age, education, gender and nationality), who did not play any hazard games regularly. In uncontrollable events participants chose from non-material causes (luck, chance, god, destiny) one they believed to be the best fit. Results have shown a statistically significant difference between gamblers and control group in the way of attributing the causes. Control group has chosen significantly more “chance” option meanwhile gamblers opted for luck, God and destiny. There was no statistically significant difference in explicitly formulated belief in luck. It seems that the stronger casual attribution of luck, god and destiny in pathological gamblers compared to non-gamblers are not restricted only to gaming situations. Rather we can find it in other uncontrollable events as well. The absence of the difference between patients and control group in explicit belief in luck measured by questionnaire could be pointing to the stronger effect of the treatment for explicit belief than for more subtle causal attributing.