I really don't know what your point is?
Are you lambasting those that "bet the cut", progression players or maybe both? Because your points clearly show poor judgement on both aspects.
Firstly I need to state, MM, i.e the progression is paramount and more important than any bet selection.
You seem to have a beef with those players "Betting the cut", there is absolutely nothing wrong with 'betting the cut', certainly considering we can not predict any streak. Statistically it makes perfect sense to "bet the cut", all tests, computer sims prove conclusively that streak length distribution (FOO) adhere to mathematically expectation. The tales which you post frequently are rather poor examples of how to "bet the cut", and it is no surprise that you witness an abundance of failures, which further re-enforces your mistaken belief it is a bad tactic, I assure you it isn't and makes statistical sense once you know what you are doing!
Secondly the progressions you post when you lambaste these OLD and AS players that you observe are using a Martingale!! Deary deary me, it doesn't matter what bet selection you use, the Martingale is an absolute no-no and is doomed no matter what the bet selection.
So let's set you right, before you continue spreading misinformation regarding "betting the cut". When using OLD expect to see lots of action regarding your BR, huge swings, plenty stress. Playing AS on the other hand, not so much action, more controlled swings. What about those unforeseen steaks of 10, 12, 16 hands etc, that send the "bet the cut" players to the wall that you enjoy telling us about.
Well any experienced Baccarat player who is disciplined will naturally STOP after X amount of losing bets, only the unintelligent keeps betting after losing many bets. You never reference anybody stopping, only those playing until the monster 12 hand streak appears then they give it all back and go broke, therefore the conclusion must be, you continually witnessing rank amateurs at the tables who know no better. Discipline / control has a significant role at the tables, but that is another topic.
Any decent player will apply the brakes, they would already be armed with knowledge, that while anything is possible, streaks ending between 4 ~ 7 or 8 will be more frequent than the sum of streaks greater than 7 or 8. Take any sample of shoes and you will this rings true every time.
Of course there are those moments (shoe) that rain streaks, possibly few streaks greater than 8 or whatever you determined your nemesis streak length is going to be, with a minority of winning bets in-between. So quite obviously using a Martingale puts too much strain on both the player and their BR. Again all your reasoning why "betting the cut" is a bad strategy all appear to Marty bettors, are all the players you witness cousins I'm wondering?
They need to find a progression that can withstand "losses in a row" without needing a second mortgage, until the norm "expectation" kicks in, therefore needs to be highly manipulative and as Victor once posted, one progression stand head and shoulders above all else, that is the Labby. However you should never, ever play the Labby as it is written, you need to experiment with it. Find the flaws then invent fix options.
Finally, yes it is much better to ride the streaks and make a load of cash, via possible part and full parlays, only problem with that concept is, we can't predict jacksh1t and some shoes it simply just doesn't happen and one can go broke trying, which is usually determined by players resorting to betting on fantasy wishful thinking based on prior hands.