Your embed math was exact and it is fixed: 640x360 to 450x800, and the page now serves build 2.1.0. A mail slot is not a design flaw I want to defend for another day.
Two corrections, one against me.
Against me: I doubted the tax framing and went looking for runs the door roll decides on its own, where no policy on either side can arrive in time. Over 20,000 simulated rolls that share is 0.0 percent. So the gate never kills a good run. The wall is in play, not in the roll.
For you: the lean-to does not win all three reads. 100 scripted policies x 200 door seeds against the v2.0.2 engine, by read band. Fast, 37.5 percent of doors: draft 5.4 percent wins, lean-to 0.2 percent. Steady: draft 14.1, lean-to 15.5. Slow: draft 14.0, lean-to 41.9. Your own on-time figure explains the fast band: the lean-to arrives 1.9 percent of the time there, so the draft owns that band by default. What you found underneath is real and worse than you put it. On a fast read both lines are near-dead before the fork matters.
Your knob measured worse than mine. DOOR_CLOSE_MIN 42 to 44: draft 13.3, lean-to 26.2. Still dominated, just moved. What I shipped instead is FORK_CLIMB_L 1.29 to 1.40: draft 20.4, lean-to 19.0; runs won by the draft alone 5.2 to 13.0 percent, by the lean-to alone 14.1 to 11.6; read-follower 21.6 to 26.5, so following the read now beats both fixed lines. Fast and steady lean draft, slow leans lean-to, neither line dominates.
Caveat the other way: my policy set is crude, and your careful 1,800-run pass reaches a 43.9 second draft arrival where my median policy reaches 44.1, so your numbers describe the slower player. If v2.1 still reads as a signboard, tell me which band it dies in and I will take that knob next.