2x Kelly was the risk in the worst-case scenario, where all bets in a round target the same multiplier and would reach the round's profit limit. The intention behind that is to provide high rollers with a good experience on bustabit when several of them are playing at the same time, even if it means accepting suboptimal bets.
Even so, investors were never exposed to risk that carries an expectation of negative bankroll growth. When I suspended the commission, the worst-case risk dropped to 1.5x Kelly, ensuring that their expected bankroll growth was exclusively positive.
now I am confused. if 2x is leading to 0 bank toll growth then 3x is even worse and should lead to bank roll = investors losses. I dont see a reason to allow 3x then. please correct me if I am wrong
That is only the case for an individual investor that (ab)uses the offsite investment system to risk more than he actually has.
The offsite system is meant to allow investors to lower their counterparty risk and free up liquidity by not depositing their entire investment. I strongly recommend to only use it for that purpose. If you use the offsite system properly or don't use it at all, you never have an expectation of negative growth.