1. Even though you need to chalk less with Kamui, you still need to chalk regularly. With Masters chalking before every shot is an easy habit to build into your preshot routine. Do you remember as easily if the time between chalking is a game or more? Or does your first miscue remind you?
Which is why I said I felt that chalking once a game, say before the break, should be plenty in my opinion. And miscues remind people to chalk no matter when they happen. Chalking before every shot does not stop miscues from happening IF the ball is addressed beyond 2.5 tips out. This happens frequently when the player is trying to add a little extra juice for some reason, maybe to spin the ball in or hold the cue ball super short.
2. All the "feelings" about more spin are meaningless. "It seemed like it to me and the two or three people standing around" doesn't qualify as a meaningful test.
No, feelings have meaning. Also regarding the P2 testimony I meant that the visitors to my shop, all good players, also TRIED the cue and verified my own experience that it allowed -somehow- for more spin to be applied. Feelings are the precursor to understanding. A phenomena has to be observed and felt to begin exploring the reason behind it.
As a player of any decent quality you know yourself and what your typical range is. Taking a draw shot as an example you pretty much know what you are capable of. So if you take the same cue you play with every day and you do your best to draw the ball as far as you can and you focus really intently on your technique then you will come to the point where you know exactly what you are capable of. Then you change cues, tips, or chalk and you see if there is a change in performance. The funny part is that if a person comes on here and says, I changed cues and I cannot draw my ball as far as I used to then no one questions that changing equipment can affect performance negatively. But if someone comes on and says I changed cues and now I can draw my ball much farther then people jump on this person as if they uttered pure blasphemy.
All I am saying is that any half decent player, me, you, Lou, plenty of us on this forum are good enough to have a decent grip on our games so that we can trust our actual on-table experiences to make assessments of whether the performance is the same, better or worse. Of course there is certainly some placebo effect there but also real world results. Either the ball consistently draws another half table length or it doesn't.
3. I don't think more spin and less deflection are related.
I don't know how related that they are. All I know is that I can do some shots using the chalk that I cannot do as easily when I don't use the chalk. WHY that is is unknown to me. I think that there has to be some correlation because if the only variable that has changed IS the chalk then where is the extra spin coming from?
It could just be from extra friction. Holding onto the ball that fraction of second longer could be the difference. I liken it to spinning a globe with a rubber glove on or a cotton glove. Obviously the cotton glove is going to slip off and the globe will not have much rotation. The rubber glove will generate a ton of rotation. So anything grippier than cotton will add more rotation. Anything less grippy than the rubber glove should add less rotation. That's my layman's understanding of friction and spin.