Exhibit A: Carissa Moore's 9.5 vs Filipe Toledo's 9.43…

Women’s Sport is hotter than fish grease. Pro leagues have popped up everywhere in Australia, pretty sure it’s happening in Europe and the Americas too.

Megan Rapinoe would be elected Prez of the USA if she ran against Trump in the 2020 election after winning the World Cup. Nothing but blue sky ahead for women surfers with pro careers in their sights.

Australian male pro surfing is circling the drain; the gals are dominating. 

In the last few days in between J-Bay and pumping surf at my home point I’ve visited the Skullcandy Grom Comp. Girls shredding everywhere, huge girl energy, everywhere you look girls are taking over.

You can’t deny the success of the investment Natasha Ziff, co-waterperson of the Year 2018, has made in Women’s Pro surfing. Three months ago, I watched a seventeen-year-old Floridian girl walk away from onshore 2ft D-Bah with a cheque for a hundred grand US in her hand.

WSL has made a gamble to put itself on the right side of history and so far the mainstream media has gobbled it up. It might turn out to be the smartest move pro surfing has ever made in it’s topsy turvy  forty-five-year history.

The most stunning aspect of the Founders Cup last May was how close or non-existent the gap between Gilmore, Wright, Moore and the top men was in the basin. Steph was the most watchable of all the surfers, male or female. Easily eclipsing, on that day, John John Florence. These aren’t value judgements, just facts of the matter.

The disparity between pay cheques between men and women has gone. The performance gap has not, but it’s closing. The most stunning aspect of the Founders Cup last May was how close or non-existent the gap between Gilmore, Wright, Moore and the top men was in the basin. Steph was the most watchable of all the surfers, male or female. Easily eclipsing, on that day, John John Florence. These aren’t value judgements, just facts of the matter. 

WSL now feels confident in an ever closer integration of mens and womens events. They share the same contest windows, and the same eyeballs. Both live and online. The days of a separate Tour schedule are almost over, apart from legacy events like Pipeline and waves still considered too gnarly like Teahupoo. They share the same audience, the same prizemoney, the same lineups, the same criteria but to even the most casual viewer the scale used to put a number on their rides is wildly different.

I said last night that it was a lack of capacity that stopped me watching more women’s pro surfing and that is true. But there is more. After watching six hours of men surfing and then in the same lineup with the same judging panel the numbers thrown at the women seem ridiculously inflated.

I said last night that it was a lack of capacity that stopped me watching more women’s pro surfing and that is true. But there is more. After watching six hours of men surfing and then in the same lineup with the same judging panel the numbers thrown at the women seem ridiculously inflated. 

Steph’s two sixes would be fours or maybe fives. Caz Marks’ eight would be more like a six. The most glaring example was Carissa Moore’s 9.5 from her quarter-final with Johanne Defay. A good wave, a great wave. Three nice turns, a fun little tube-ride.

When we put side by side with Filipe Toledo’s 9.43 opener for his heat against the Panda the difference is stark. Staggering. Every variety of top turn and power carve on display with a strong ending. 

Why the discrepancy? With the women on full pay do they really need the babyfood scores fed to them like mashed banana? Is it not disrespectful to their status as athletes and elite level surfers to be so clearly patronised by exactly the same judging panel using the same criteria?

What message does it send to the kiddies, the future?

That we’ll pay you the same but score you differently?

Down at the Oz Grom Comp I watched the best kids of the future. Gals shredding as hard as boyos. What incentive have they got to elevate the level, to future proof the sport if they know they are going to get fed highballed scores for surfing well below the level they are capable of reaching.

Equal pay has been a boon for women’s surfing. Time for an equal judging scale to be applied if the Tours are to co-exist.

Four high-pressure heats contested with world title hopes on the line…

It’s getting real in the women’s world title race now. The opening heats for the women at J-Bay set up the quarterfinals perfectly.

Each of the high seeds made it through, which meant four high-pressure heats contested with world title hopes on the line. The atmospherics of dreamy J-Bay felt at odds with the stakes. Even the inevitable point break lulls ratcheted up the tension.

This year’s narrative was set to be a rivalry between Stephanie Gilmore and newcomer Caroline Marks.

I’ll confess I rolled my eyes a bit at the notion that we could decide the narrative back at the opening event, but having written press releases a few times in my life, you have to write something.

In any case, the Gilmore-Marks title race hasn’t really materialized, thanks to inconsistent performances from both women. Other contenders such as Carissa Moore and Sally Fitzgibbons, meanwhile, have steadily climbed the rankings.

Though this year has never been a two-woman race, the quarterfinal between Gilmore and Marks was a big heat for both of them.

For Gilmore, it was a crucial heat if she wants to chase down Carissa Moore and Sally Fitzgibbons for the world title. Gilmore has struggled to bring her best surfing to the party this year. The gorgeous style will always be there, but at crucial points she’s failed to get the scores that add up to a world title.

Marks, meanwhile, needed to win this heat to pull herself out of the two-way tie with Lakey Peterson for fifth and climb back into the title race, if she can. As the fourth-placed American in the rankings going into J-Bay, Marks also needed a good heat to keep her Olympic dreams alive.

It is always a shock to me when Steph Gilmore falls on a wave. Wait, what? How is that even possible? When Gilmore is at her best, it feels like nothing could ever go wrong.

In her heat against Marks, Gilmore fell twice on scoring waves, and quite simply, that was the game. Marks surfed as well as ever with an 8.17 and a 6.27 as her keepers but Gilmore largely defeated herself on this one.

A pair of sixes at a right-hand point is a rough day at the office for Gilmore and in a post-heat interview, she said it was a crucial heat and a tough loss. She isn’t out of the title race just yet, but losing that heat just made the whole thing much more difficult.

Of the women in these quarterfinals, Carissa Moore surfed the best. Smooth, controlled, powerful. She seemed to see what the wave was going to do before it happened. She never fell out sync, there were no frantic chases down the line to get back in the pocket.

If you didn’t see the 9.5, it’s worth finding. She slid into that cheeky barrel on the end section like it was nothing, never mind the rocks lurking just beneath the surface. Against anyone else, Johanne Defay might have had a shot at this one. She surfed well, but Moore was simply on another level. There’s not much you can do with a 17-point combo.

Thanks to the post-heat interview I learned that Moore and Defay are good friends and traveling together at J-Bay. This is fine, but it felt like waste of an interview to me. Anyone who’s spent any time around women’s sports knows the friendship stops when the competition begins. No one’s going to really spare a thought for their bestie when the world title is on the line. Moore handled it with her characteristic grace, of course. She’ll meet Marks in the semifinal, which is going to be fire.

My heart always says Malia, but my head said that certainly Sally Fitzgibbons would win this one. Not so fast. J-Bay suits Manuel’s smooth style and clean rail work. She came out firing on and scored a 7.0 on her opening wave. If her turns lacked the dynamism and power of Moore, Manuel looked poised and beautifully controlled.

Fitzgibbons answered back with fast, hammering turns. The judges rightly rewarded her tighter, more vertical turns a bit more than Manuel’s more flowing style, but the heat remained a nailbiter.

Then things got wild. Manuel fell after taking a wave on priority, leaving her with no backup score. A lull created a high-tension waiting game. Then with priority, Manuel went to go, but changed her mind. Along the way, she also prevented Fitzgibbons from taking the wave. That meant Manuel lost priority. Fitzgibbons scooped up the next one, but only managed a 6.17. Good, but not the emphatic finish she might have liked.

Point breaks are a finicky business. Long lulls. Two-wave sets alternated with five- or even ten-wave sets. Manuel quite simply got lucky. Instead of a two-wave set, the waves just kept coming. Manuel has an almost zenlike presence and it served her well here. She scrapped into the last wave of the set, waited for the white water section to clear, threw down a series of clean, arcing turns.

Just nail the close-out and win the heat: That’s it. Manuel went big on the final section, but fell on the closeout. The cameras showed her on the beach, waiting for the score to come though. It felt like forever, watching it. She got it.

A 7.03 on her final wave sends Manuel to the semi-final.

I was looking forward to the heat between Courtney Conlogue and Lakey Peterson. Both are insanely competitive and dynamic. You never really know what Conlogue, in particular, is going to do on a wave. Her opener featured an insane close-out move. The judges weren’t that into close-out moves this time around, it seems, because I expected a higher score for that one than they delivered. Conlogue took an early lead with a 7.33.

Peterson answered back in short order with a signature wave. A series of tight, vertical turns linked seamlessly. And fast. Peterson has so much speed. She’s always right on the edge of it, which is nerve-wracking to watch. I’m not sure about that head throw in the midst of the hooking turn she loves so much. An 8.57 gave her the lead and the heat looked to be a competitive one.

It took a turn when Conlogue needed a board change. If you’re going to break your board in a heat, J-Bay is a hell of a place to do it. Paddle back up to the keyhole, get to the beach, paddle back out. I thought the heat was over for Conlogue. There was no way Peterson wasn’t going to make the most of sitting alone in the lineup. But Peterson could only pick up a 4.50 during Conlogue’s board change.

Game still on.

Except Conlogue paddled back out to a flat ocean. Just then, J-Bay decided to do stupid point break things and the lull from hell began. Peterson and Conlogue sat there, bobbing up and down, staring at the horizon. Pretty much nothing happened. Finally, one wave slouched down the point. With priority, Peterson scooped it up, scored a 5.83, and that was the heat. It was all a bit of a letdown, given the dynamic styles of the two women in the water. Peterson meets Manuel in the semifinal, which will be quite the contrast in styles.

With Fitzgibbons out, Moore needs to make the final in order to take over the lead in the rankings. That means beating Marks. Based on their quarterfinal heat scores, Moore has the edge, but both women have shown that they are big-heat surfers. They bring their best when it matters, and Moore has steadily built a solid foundation for a title run.

While the narrative has focused on Gilmore and Marks, Moore is quietly waiting to pounce.

Corona Open J-Bay Women’s Quarterfinal Results:
QF 1: Caroline Marks (USA) 14.44 DEF. Stephanie Gilmore (AUS) 13.10
QF 2: Carissa Moore (HAW) 17.67 DEF. Johanne Defay (FRA) 12.50
QF 3: Malia Manuel (HAW) 14.03 DEF. Sally Fitzgibbons (AUS) 13.50
QF 4: Lakey Peterson (USA) 14.40 DEF. Courtney Conlogue (USA) 11.00

Corona Open J-Bay Women’s Semifinal Matchups:
SF 1: Caroline Marks (USA) vs. Carissa Moore (HAW)
SF 2: Malia Manuel (HAW) vs. Lakey Peterson (USA)

A little rope of drool runs down your chin as South African grand slam finally comes to life…

How many narratives you want? Jordy, Gabriel, Kolohe, Filipe, Iggy…Kelly. 

A world title race for the ages with a man almost hitting fifty able to steal into the top five, a kid who’s played second-viola to his childhood pal for the last decade suddenly propelled into the ratings lead and a defending champ rising from the dead.

Waves? I’m told it’s good to gooder.

If you’re in the US, throw a few candy peppermints in your vodka martini; Australia, you got two hours before dark.

Europe? Still partying, yeah? The sky a swollen purple, your body jerking in little spasms? Stay with us.

Watch here. 

Comment below.

Corona Open J-Bay Men’s Round of 16 Matchups:
Heat 1: Jordy Smith (ZAF) vs. Owen Wright (AUS)
Heat 2: Gabriel Medina (BRA) vs. Ryan Callinan (AUS)
Heat 3: Kolohe Andino (USA) vs. Deivid Silva (BRA)
Heat 4: Ezekiel Lau (HAW) vs. Adrian Buchan (AUS)
Heat 5: Filipe Toledo (BRA) vs. Willian Cardoso (BRA)
Heat 6: Sebastian Zietz (HAW) vs. Michel Bourez (FRA)
Heat 7: Kanoa Igarashi (JPN) vs. Peterson Crisanto (BRA)
Heat 8: Kelly Slater (USA) vs. Italo Ferreira (BRA)

"I say that as preamble because I have always seemed to struggle on the CI's."

It’s an internet proverb that people generally surf better on Merricks/Channel Islands surfboards. In the particular it’s hard to argue against with respect to Tom Curren, Kelly Slater and Dane.

Go back to 2012/13 when Kelly was rocking the hexagons at Cloudbreak and marvel at the union of man and surfboard.

Or Tom on the Red Beauties at the Stubbies, with the vest and the cute French wife.

Dane in Mexico on sawn off Neckbeards with the pudgy white Dad legs was mind exploding.

Sure Kelly is going alright now with the Tokoros and the Aipas but he’s never had his equipment dialled in as solidly as when he was on the CI’s.

Unsponsored shredders also do very well on them. I say that as preamble because I have always seemed to struggle on the CI’s. I don’t know why. I found the Rocket Wide tricky and temperamental, I passed it onto a friend and he ripped on it.

So, unlike Jamie Brisick and his martinis, I approached the CI Happy with low expectations. Circumstances that followed were not kind. I had a lot of trouble getting go-outs on it.

After putting the best wax job in history on it the surf went flat.

Then the wind howled and it went giant.

I rode a Bonzer Octafish in tiny rock runners then a Brewer gun in wild holy rollers out near the shipping channel while the perfectly waxed Happy sat under a table in the house. Sharkiness increased and interrupted the seasonal surf program.

Loved the outline, was looking for the right day.

When it was apparent I was under some CI curse it seemed time to pass it on over to my Bribie pal unridden and let him get after it. On the way to his gaff I checked the point, which I do about 50 times a day and the waves looked fun.

Not giant, not tiny rock runners. The right day to get Happy in the water.

The detour via other boards of very different provenance was fortuitous. Compared to the Sharp Eye HT2.5 which I’d been riding religiously and relentlessly the Happy is a very different beast. Narrower in the nose and tail*.

The Sharp Eye has more nose and tail flip compared to the Happy’s lower entry rocker, fairly low curve and typical Merrick tail curve. Which meant for practical purposes I found the HT2.5 a better paddler getting from A to B in the lineup while the Happy paddled into waves better.

Neither are, by any means, good paddlers, so if you have cooked shoulders you ain’t in the ballpark for either sled. Walk on by. Don’t let the video footage of Connor Coffin at Kirra fool you; he’s getting towed back to the take-off by a jetski: for the working gal who has to paddle back there’s no easy metres on a Happy.

Somehow, and I don’t know how because it makes no sense, I found the rocker curve easier to get along with than the Rocket Wide. No obvious quirks in the board. This is riding it in mediocre-to-good Point surf, which is daily fare on this coastline during southern Hemi Winter

First impressions: maybe I won’t pass this onto my pal just yet. Had to ignore a couple of texts asking me when I was going to drop the board around. Tight outline wants to get right up into the pocket and whip around. Carves through a turn very cleanly. Standard single-concave-to-double-concave bottom feels completely familiar and runs clean while rolling onto a rail in a predictable fashion.

Somehow, and I don’t know how because it makes no sense, I found the rocker curve easier to get along with than the Rocket Wide. No obvious quirks in the board. This is riding it in mediocre-to-good Point surf, which is daily fare on this coastline during southern Hemi Winter.

The Happy travelled a couple of points further south for a weekend of more intense testing in a major eas- swell event. In an unruly ragged double overhead rock bottom lineup the board felt undernourished and underpowered for the way I like to get around a lineup.

Too many nursed turns and late drops out of pitching lips. I went back to a 6’6” Desert Storm with substantially more horsepower the next day and had more fun.

The surf pumped and my local had the day of the year. I rode the bigger board and picked off bombs. Next day, with a slight diminishment in size but still double overhead I took the Happy out.

Surprisingly, in solid but cleaner conditions it gobbled up the extra juice. It’s not a wide point forwards design like the Pyzel Ghost or Lost Sabotaj. Put it on the ground and stare at it long enough and you’ll see an early 90’s style outline.

Sometime in the mid-90’s Litmus bought in the retro movement then Occy and Sunny’s World Titles banished the 90’s style Merrick’s for good. If you ever wondered what would happen if those boards had a decent meal and were given sane rocker curves then the Happy is a result.

That petite squash appeals to me. The narrow tail gives more latitude for lax back-foot placement and a weak back leg. If you do have a functioning rail game based on the back foot you’ll find the Happy whips through a turn in the bowl with much control.

If you were new to the Futures game starting with AM1’s or AM2’s would be a very high percentage play. That’s the basic Merrick template that works in anything. I use tail width as the starting point. Narrower tail block, like the Happy and the AM1’s get the jersey. If you just had those two fin sets you’re covered for 99% of the shortboard game.

The higher end surprised me. I used JJF M fins made from recycled plastic and they felt good and made me feel OK when my teenage daughter asked me what I was doing to address climate change. The Futures fin is the clearly superior removable fin system but the website can be confusing. The JJF fin is a neutral feeling fin that feels solid in good waves. It doesn’t dominate the hull in any directional sense. The Alpha material fin I used, made from recycled plastic is a bit more flexy than the stiffer tech-flex. It felt a bit more lively than I thought from giving it a hand flex test. Felt zero compunction to change out the JJF fins.

If you were new to the Futures game starting with AM1’s or AM2’s would be a very high percentage play. That’s the basic Merrick template that works in anything. I use tail width as the starting point. Narrower tail block, like the Happy and the AM1’s get the jersey. If you just had those two fin sets you’re covered for 99% of the shortboard game.

Pretty sure I could shred a wave at lower trestles on the Happy, though if I’m being perfectly honest I’d rather pick a board out of Joel Tudor’s quiver with some more crowd control built into it.

If you didn’t need to pick something off the rack consider adding some customisation to this board. I’d add an inch or two while keeping roughly the same volume, the board rides a little smaller than it’s dimensions due to the pulled nose and tail. Add a little glass and weight. Make it a proper step-up.

The Team Light glass job felt a little flimsy in bigger than overhead surf with wind and bump. If you like them light the Spine Tek construction would add more durability.

If you are in Germany, or Slovenia or Novia Scotia, where boards are hard to come by, you could order this online, I think, and get what you pay for.

If you are in a country with surf shops then CI’s are everywhere, so my recommendation would be to put one under the wing. If that narrow squash appeals – and that is the main feature of the board – then this whip will go fine for you.

*Don’t expect much low end with the reduction in planing area in the tail. But I bet this would go great at Slater’s surf basin.