The thing with progressive staking plans: ie: increasing stakes after a loser is, can you handle it (mentally and fiscally) when the stakes rise to an uncomfortable level. If betting one horse a race you are going to get long losing runs.

It has been said on this forum many times. If you are making a level stakes profit (be it 5-10% or whatever) why bother with taking the approach of increasing stakes. Just cruise along betting the same amount and collect your 5-10% at regular intervals. No mental torture.

This thread brings me to a thought. (It hurt a little bit.)
The great drawback of the progressive staking it seems has always been in the inevitable long losing run, mainly because of betting just one horse per race, the stakes required can mount up.

What if you were betting two, even three horses a race. You would have to work out how to bet your set amount. But you would have less losing runs and smaller ones in general. I know I have methods that can pick the winner of selected races in two horses 45-50% of the time.

Would you dutch bet to set amount? ie: Race 1 - $10, divided between your two horses. No winner. Race 2 - $20, divided between your two horses.

Anyway after all that if your making a level stakes profit, leave it alone.