UPDATED ANSWER
The diagram below left looks at a cross-section along the length of the elastic rails. The ball (blue) rests on the 2 wires (red). Assuming there is no friction between ball and rails, the contact forces (N) which the ball exerts on the rails are normal to the surface of the ball and radially outwards. There are thus horizontal components of N, which push the elastic wires outwards and downwards. The wires exert equal and opposite forces N on the ball, pushing it inwards and upwards.
The condition for balance is that $2N\cos B=W=mg\cos\theta$, where $\theta$ is the local angle of inclination of the rails - either due to local deformation or the global slope between supports. When the net tension $F$ in the rail normal to the surface of the ball then $N$ equals Floris' force $F$. If the ball is only just heavy enough to slip between the rails, this will happen at the midpoint, where $\theta$ is the inclination between supports.
The middle figure is the same view as on the left but focussing on the movement of the rails. The rails and supports are initially at X before the ball reaches the midpoint. As the elastic rail extends and sags the contact point moves outward while the support move vertically upwards relative to the ball.
If the contact point is at Y while the support is at X" then the rail is in the plane YX" with net tension force $F$ directed along YX"; there is a component of this force $F$ which tends to move the rail further outward round the ball' surface. If the support is at X' on radius OY then the force $F$ from the rail is normal to the surface of the ball; $F=N$ and there is no tendency for the rail to move any further around the ball, either inwards or outwards.
The rightmost figure illustrates the elongation of the rails and its connection with z=YX' in the middle figure. Angle $A=\frac12\theta$ in Floris' 1st diagram.
From the geometry in the middle and right figures we have :
$(a-z)\sin B=w$
$L^2-L_0^2=(L-L_0)(L+L_0) \approx z^2$
$x=L-L_0 \approx \frac{z^2}{2L_0}$
because $L \approx L_0$. Here $a$ is the radius of the ball, $2w$ is the lateral separation of the supports and $2L_0$ the longitudinal separation.
When $N=F$ then by substitution, using z as a convenient parameter, this becomes :
$$T=\frac{mg\cos\theta}{4\sin A\cos B} \approx \frac{L_0 mg\cos\theta}{4z\sqrt{1-(\frac{w}{a-z})^2}}$$
With the values for $m, a, w, L_0$ which you supplied, and taking a mean value of $\theta=15^{\circ}$, I have plotted the RHS (red) for the 2 values of $m$ in the graph below.
The remaining task is to find the pre-loaded tension $T_0$ which will give the required value of $T$ for optimum separation of the balls when they reach the midpoint. The difficulty is that Hooke's Law may not apply for the elastic strings. You will need to examine load $T$ vs extension $x$ experimentally to see if it does apply and under what conditions. According to Do Rubber Bands act like Springs?, if the rubber band is not stretched too quickly and it has exceeded an initial minimum extension, then it does obey a modified version of Hooke's Law :
$T=kx+c$
where $k$ and $c$ are constants which you can find from your graph of load vs extension. When $z=0$ then the pre-loaded tension in the rails is $T_0$ so we can write
$T=T_0+k\frac{k}{2L_0}z^2$.
This can be plotted on the same graph (blue) using an arbitrary values of $T_0$ to shift the blue line vertically until it intersects the red lines with the largest separation, so that a small change in tension gives a large change in the mass which falls through. (I have assumed an arbitrary value of $k=500$).
The best value for this is $T_0 \approx 2$. From this and your equation $T=kx+c$ you can work out what length of unstretched elastic your need.
I assume that $a$ and $m$ are constants, things you cannot vary. Values you can vary are $w, L_0, \theta, T_0$. One question to ask is : What combination of these variables allows you the maximum discrimination between the two masses given? You could explore the predictions for various combinations of parameters, particularly those which have most influence.
Some limitations of the above analysis :
It does not take account of friction. While this may be small for the marble, probably it is significant for wood.
The rolling balls may cause vibrations in the strings which help them slip around the balls more easily. This may compensate somewhat for friction, or perhaps over-compensate and cause balls to fall with more tension that this theory predicts they will need.