"LADDER STAKING PLAN
112233445566778899 ect.
Continue up the ladder, win, loose or draw, until in profit, then start again."

I bet the people who put these sort of ideas up don't use them. In fact they probably are just trying to boost the pools they sup from by trying to convince everyone else to use these 'progressive' ideas. Especially when these threads are continually being dragged up from years ago [this one 2003] :-)

If we have a run of outs of 17 on the above ladder and say our units are $10 [for the bets to be meaningful], we would be having a $90 bet on our 18th. bet to recover [chasing our losses] $810 plus our $90 bet. We need a $9 winner just to get back to where we started from. For $20 units [more meaningful] we a into serious high risk punting. God help you if you like $100 unit bets.

The problem with these 'mild' progressions is they look safe and sensible, but their down side is the punter is quickly chasing higher and higher odds to break even let alone turn a profit. If our 18th. bet loses we are having a $100 bet to recover $1000 and now need a $10 winner to break even. It all gets out of hand very quickly, especially when you get into the 'etc' area of the above ladder. Even for a run of ten outs you have punted $300 and your next bet of $60 needs a winner paying $3.60 to break even [forget profit].

I used to believe in the 'reasoning' of progressive staking because I'm certainly no maths star [far from it], but after reading articles from real mathematicians I've jumped off the believer's ship.

At this stage proponents are saying a run of 18 outs and probably even 10 outs is impossible. Yep, sure thing :-)