A few days ago, we discussed a possible major turning point for Olympic surfing with the reform of qualifications for the 2028 Los Angeles Games.
The idea? Drastically reduce the Championship Tour (CT) part of the World Surf League (WSL) in favor of International Surfing Association (ISA) competitions. While the aim was to balance the odds and intensify competition, the announcement did not receive unanimous support. Behind the scenes and on social media, discontent is rising among some of the biggest names in the circuit.
The controversial reform: less CT, more ISA
To recap, the ISA’s proposal would limit to five spots per gender via the CT, potentially restricting it to one surfer per country, whereas previous cycles (Tokyo 2020, Paris 2024) allocated a much larger part through the final CT rankings. The goal was to give more weight to the ISA World Surfing Games, providing an opportunity for emerging nations and intensifying the value of these world championships.
The wave of criticism: “A total lack of respect”
However, this reform, presented as strategic by the ISA, is perceived as an affront by many CT athletes. Reactions were immediate, with a rising tone, particularly on social media.
Among the most critical voices are leading figures like Yago Dora, the current reigning world champion. His verdict is clear: “Very disrespectful to the best competition surfers in the world. A total lack of respect in the way they have handled this, absolutely sad for our sport and the future generations of surfers.”
Leo Fioravanti echoes this sentiment, noting that the previous system worked “perfectly” by ensuring the presence of the best. He protests, “Now, the WSL World Champion 2027 isn’t even guaranteed to compete in the Olympic Games.” He also criticizes a lack of communication: “On behalf of the WSL surfers, we tried to communicate with the ISA to find the best solution for everyone, but the ISA refused to collaborate.”
João “Chumbinho” Chianca expresses his “shame” at this decision taken “behind our backs,” deeming the qualification system “unfair” and accusing the ISA of “not respecting our opinions.”
Erin Brooks emphasizes consistency: “Consistency at the highest level is what defines competitive surfing. The WSL Championship Tour is where it happens, and the Olympic qualification path should reflect this even more strongly.”
Lakey Peterson shares a similar disappointment: “Such a shame to see this. A total lack of respect for the WSL surfers. We would have liked you to discuss with us before making this decision, as we have tried to meet with you several times, and you have canceled, acting behind our backs and not allowing open communication with the surfers whose lives are affected by this.”
Even Caity Simmers and Luana Silva have expressed their disagreement, the former with a simple “two thumbs down” and the latter with a clear “We do not agree with this system.”
The heart of the problem: fear of losing or missed opportunity?
These criticisms raise a fundamental question: why this reluctance to invest more in ISA events? Some commentators do not hesitate to speak of “fear of losing” against surfers from emerging nations, or “disdain” towards an organization which, let’s not forget, is the only path to the Olympics.
The contrast is striking with the example of Gabriel Medina in Puerto Rico in 2024. Having missed direct Olympic qualification, he fully committed to the ISA World Surfing Games, winning the championship with palpable emotion and securing his ticket. A performance hailed as an example of “courage” and determination in the face of the Olympic stakes.
The ISA is accused of acting behind the scenes and defending its own interests. Meanwhile, CT surfers believe that the current system, which favors the cream of the WSL, ensures Olympic quality. The divide is deep.
Towards Los Angeles 2028: a “more contested” and tense path
While the ISA’s intention is to make the road to Los Angeles 2028 “much more contested” and to value its own competitions, the method and reception of this reform reveal significant tension between the two major entities of global surfing. Final details are yet to be confirmed, but one thing is certain: Olympic surfing is at a crossroads, and peace has not yet been achieved among all stakeholders.
The stakes are no longer just sporting; they are also political. And they could reshape the landscape of competitive surfing for years to come.
