I have mixed feelings about theoffline idea. Surely it is innovative, but is it fair? People are allowed to lie about their offline stakes which basically means that if they lose their investment, the max bet will decrease dramatically, as they cannot fill up again with their non-existent coins.
Who are you arguining that it is unfair to?
* the investor who is 'lying' can lose his coins pretty quickly - but he knows that going in, so that's not unfair
* the player who wins big sees that the max profit drops a lot after his win - but he just won big, so he's not complaining
* the investor won isn't lying sees his share of the bankroll diluted by 'lying' investors - but he gets to stay invested when the liar investors are forced out by a winning player, and gets a much bigger share if the winning player turns into a losing player after that
Secondly, math tells us that 1% max bet is the fastest way to increase your profits.
I think it tells us that risking 1% of your investment on every bet maximises the expected value of the logarithm of your bankroll - or something like that. To maximise the expected value of your bankroll when you have an edge you should risk everything on every roll shouldn't you? Your expected profit is 1% of the amount the player risks, so you want them to risk as much as possible against you. The reason we look to maximise the logarithm of the bankroll is that when you have 100 coins, losing 100 is catastrophic, but winning 100 isn't equal and opposite. 100 and 200 are similar amounts, one being only twice the other, but 100 is many times bigger than 0.
Now people are allowed to increase their risk (when lying) to more than 10% against their own interest (the fact that some JD investors aren't proficient in statistics was already clear though.)
In the end I find myself making a guesswork of how much I should declare offline in order to reach a 0.5% of risk that I want to afford.
We can't tell whether it's against their own interest or not, or whether they're lying, since we have no idea of the size of their whole bankroll. Most of it won't be CLAMs anyway.
If you want to risk 0.5% of your bankroll per roll, calculate the size of your bankroll, work out what that comes to in CLAMs, subtract your onsite investment size from that number, and that tells you how much you should declare to be '/offsite'. For this you need to decide what constitutes your bankroll. You'll also need to regularly monitor the situation - perhaps the price of CLAM changes, or the value of the non-CLAM part of your bankroll.