This is a matter of math and logic.  Some people argued that the max bet was too high and the variance allowed a whale with a large enough bankroll to win despite the house edge.  There is plenty of evidence lately that this is the case.  Nakowa himself agrees with this and has said so.  Others argued that the max bet had to kept at 1% to give them a chance to recoup their losses.  But this sounds like gambler's fallacy... what's lost is lost, and there is no reversion to the mean to make things right again.

My point is that math is not a democracy.  Voting to set pi equal to 3 does not make it so.

JD is an experiment.  Let's see what happens, analyze some more data and reconsider the max bet.