becareful,
You have explained my reasoning well.
A jockey may achieve a seasonal strike rate of 50% by riding 100 placers from 100 rides and then missing with his next 100. This is an extreme example but it makes a point.
I know Equine Investor drops jocks who are out of form but the subjectivity mixed with the mechanical system is messy. Surely the reasoning of the progressive stakers is that the jockeys will come good sooner or later and that is why the bets are increased accordingly. So why drop Munce for example because he has ridden poorly for a couple of meetings? He was selected in the first place because he is a leading jockey with an excellent strike rate. Bets slide upwards on the basis that the longer he goes without a hit the closer he is getting. So why drop him in the first place? Doesn't the placegetters theory mean he is about to gave a great day?
I think the real problem I have with the whole concept is that the Progressive staker would be secretly hoping that Oliver's first 3 mounts that are paying $1.10 a place all miss so that his 4th mount which is paying $5 a place will lob with his $1800 on board.
If the first 3 lobbed and he picked up $100 x 1.10 he wins $30. The other way he drops $1200 on the first 3 (100,300,800) then cleans up with a $7200 win on bet 4. If you secretly hope the horse you are on loses then there is something wrong.