Enough of the rumors. Enough of the confusion. Enough of the chest pounding. Get in the habit of saying it. Breathe deep and let it out: The “Kelly Tour” is dead. Skip the other stages of grief, because the corpse is already beginning to stink.

The Assn. of Surfing Professionals, having voted in sweeping changes last week that effectively killed the so-called Champions Surf Tour, gets back to regular business and wraps up the European leg of the World Tour this week with the Rip Curl Pro Search in Portugal. There, presumably Mick Fanning will increase his lead and Joel Parkinson’s nightmare season will get a little bit worse just in time for Halloween.

The changes include an increase in prize money - especially for the women’s tour, a health plan, chopping the men’s world tour from 45 to 32 surfers and in conjunction with that, the most complex change of all, a new “unified tour” that replaces the current two-tier system of the World Tour and Qualifying Series.

But let us review what a long, strange summer it was on the tour when a bizarre drama unfolded over three months around the planet for …well, for no good reason at all, really.

What happened in a minute, but why it all happened is still the big mystery. Probably one that will never truly be answered. A couple of theories have bounced around. And before this goes any further, it should be said that neither Terry Hardy nor Matt Tinley, two of the three provocateurs in this wild tale, responded to requests to be interviewed for this story.

The first theory that says nine time world champ Kelly Slater did this to create a lot of noise and distract Parkinson from a chance at a title of his own is the most farfetched. It’s preposterous to think even Slater, who is the mind game master, would go to all the trouble of creating something this elaborate, or so potentially embarrassing just for that purpose. However, it is a safe assumption Slater must have something better to do with his time. Like, say, surf.

It’s important to at least consider the possibility that Slater, his manager Hardy, and boxing promoter Tinley had an actual rival tour in the works but either the current global economic climate or their own incompetence choked the deal. Not that farfetched.

The third is that somehow Slater always wanted these changes at ASP and this was his best plan to make them happen. Essentially force ASP, the surf brands and fellow surfers to respond by offering the threat of a new tour that could outshine and overthrow them. Even if it’s true, and it could be, try reading this paragraph again aloud and you’ll hear how ridiculous that sounds.

The best guess is some combination of the last two. But it’s hard not to feel like an idiot entertaining any of that, either. That’s what silence on the other end of a conversation can do. Eventually you fill in the blanks with whatever is lying around.

This saga began last February, when Slater appeared in a story for ESPN Magazine decreeing the 10 things - well, eight actually, he’d like to change about the current state of pro surfing. The ideas were generally on the money, even if a few have been well-discussed topics over the years. The ideas were formed in part through conversations with ASP World Tour manager Renato Hickel. Slater mentions the following: a new governing body that would own, run and market the events; cutting the men’s tour in half; cutting the season; marketing the sport better; encouraging the pros to shape their own competition boards; having contest formats fit the location; move the ASP headquarters from Australia back to Southern California and hold more high end events in the U.S.; and make a wave pool good enough to compete in. The other two were really about his career.  

Some ASP staff privately grumbled that Slater had publicly grumbled, but it was neither Slater’s first gripe nor ASP’s first public relations problem. With the start of the World Tour, the episode was mostly forgotten.

The hedging of bets got underway when Quiksilver USA president Bob McKnight invited the surf industry leaders - and not ASP -  to a meeting on July 2 at the Quiksilver HQ in Huntington Beach. There, Hardy gave an outline of the potential tour and told the group an agreement had been reached with ESPN and the Champions Surf Tour would happen with or without their help and be run right over the back of the current World Tour. He laid out a tour featuring just 16 invited men’s surfers competing in eight events in a May to September season. There would be a much bigger prize purse and a regular prime-time TV spot.

Hardy did not name any surfers who had agreed to be part of the tour nor did he disclose any event locations. The network later told ASP no contract has been signed and no money has changed hands between them.

The industry members agreed ASP was flawed, but told them in clear terms they had to address their issues with ASP. Plus, Hardy and Tinley just seemed to rub them all the wrong way. “They came across extremely arrogant,” said one industry insider.

But in July, Slater sent an email to fellow surfers during the Billabong Pro event at Jeffreys Bay, South Africa. The information eventually gets to ASP as well. According to the Australian newspaper, he announced “ESPN has signed on to support and fully back a tour to potentially start next year … Basically they are looking to present a fully professional sports package of surfing to the world with dedicated prime-time TV and the best live webcasting available.”

The email sent confusion out among the ranks. At that point, Slater was chained to the “rebel tour” whether he liked it or not (as was McKnight) and though he stated in the email the tour would be “what the surfers want to have in terms of judging, locations, formats, etc.” The presumption among many surfers was those things would be picked - and ultimately under the control of - Slater and his group.

“They were courting surfers like there was no tomorrow” an insider said. But how many really signed up? Various media inquiries have yet to confirm a person, other than Slater.

By late July, speculation had grown  rampant about the tour and who would be on it. In the pro ranks, surfers were curious, but reticent to jump if they were asked. And no one seemed to know anybody who was. The idea of only 16 handpicked surfers competing for much bigger money than they were making on the World Tour created a wave of resentment. The resentment came because the vast majority of pros realized if the thing were to happen, it wouldn’t involve them. A sign of the already souring view and suspicion came when “the Kelly’s Phonebook Tour” nickname picked up usage at the U.S. Open.  

A summer of hedging took root because neither the brands nor the surfers were content with the status quo at ASP, but they were also not at all sure if the new tour would ever get off the ground despite all the big talk. No one wanted to be left out, but no one was ready to be a mutineer either. A few pros said they would jump then quickly backed off. The ASP World Tour was still the devil they knew. It was still the thing that everyone could see, touch, interact with and bitch about when they wanted. This new thing, this Champions Surf Tour or whatever you preferred to call it, was not much more than a Power Point presentation to the rest of the surfing world.

“There has been nothing official, so it is all just speculation,” tour surfer Bede Durbidge told Surfing Magazine in irritation. What was worse, the women had been left out entirely. “At first, it was surprising. It was threatening,” says defending world champ Stephanie Gilmore. “All the tour was focusing on was the men.”

Hardy finally did talk to ASP head Brodie Carr in a private meeting in Huntington Beach during the U.S. Open. A week later, Carr met with Hardy and Tinley. Up to that point, the ASP really had no official position on the issue because they’d been left in the dark and didn’t have enough information to actually have an opinion. But Carr, when asked, repeatedly said he was willing to listen, especially if Slater was involved in the plan. He even took the view that ASP would be a collaborator if these guys could really produce a better tour. In fact, the bluster being hurled around early on by Slater, Hardy and Tinley, plus McKnight’s involvement did shake up staff at ASP, getting some to polish their resumes. But it also shook ASP into action. The momentum was about to change.

“We have history and we have stakeholders and a thousand surfers. For us to quickly change to something has an impact on different levels,” Carr says. “The others can make up whatever they want because they don’t.”

Tinley tells Carr the ASP can play along or be left behind. Carr asked for details about the tour, but didn’t receive more than what was given to industry leaders at the Quiksilver meeting. Carr needed to know that they intended to crown a world champ. They did. That begged another question about who a legitimate world champ would be. One overriding question never got answered. “Who are the owners? They didn’t want to tell me,” Carr says. “I made it clear to Matt the surfers want to know who they’re surfing for. They need to know they have a say. I want to tell every surfer who owns it. I still don’t know. It’s kind of wishy-washy.”

Communication between the ASP and CST groups hit a stalemate by August. Carr rallied his people in Australia at a meeting called “The Rabbit Camp” with former pro and former ASP president Rabbit Bartholomew. There they drafted a list of 20 things to put on the agenda at the next board meeting. “When we all stepped back from our personal interests and started to think about what was best, we were all clear,” he says. “We pulled it together in two days. You could feel the sense of cooperation.”

Gilmore admits she was “Floating along not thinking about how I could make it better. Now people have to be involved.”

During the Hurley Pro, Carr had dinner with several surfers and industry leaders who essentially pledged their support to the ASP if the board passed all or most of the 20 items. The industry was not willing to back the rebels in either sponsoring events or lending their surfers. The thing “never caught fire” as one industry leader put it partly because nobody trusted Tinley, who had been the subject of several lawsuits from previous business dealings. “The result speaks for itself” he says.

Meanwhile, things had gone silent on the rebel tour side. Press conference dates were announced then quietly disregarded. A few investors expressing interest in the new tour were either put off or ignored. Hardy and Tinley went incommunicado, leaving Slater to answer questions all by himself. He began to distance himself from the tour issue saying only that he wanted whatever is in the best interest of surfing. Then he goes mum until the Hurley Pro. 

“I kind of thought at some point it was dead,” Carr says. Another ASP source describes the goings on as “Kafka-esque.”

Carr asserts that if Slater, who has never served as a board member or surfer’s representative at ASP, had brought his ideas to them they would have been taken seriously. It’s a very arguable point. At the board meeting in February, before the ESPN story, a paring back of the men’s tour was voted down.

At Trestles, Slater opened up. “Rumor number one is that this is my tour. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I’m not on the ground level of starting this tour. I don’t have a financial interest in it, but I’m happy to give my two cents to whoever is trying to better what we’re doing. I have no problem helping if what I can do helps.”

Even after the board vote, the silence remains on the rebel tour side. Carr nevertheless is acknowledging a rebel tour effect. “This has expedited change at ASP. Maybe that was Kelly’s doing. If it’s him that has pushed that along, cool,” he says.

Slater is less generous. “On the positive side, it would appear they’re open to making change. On the other hand, it wouldn’t have happened if somebody didn’t put any pressure on them. The timing is all too perfect for it to just happen coincidentally. It’s going in line toward the things we the surfers are hoping to happen to our sport but it’s not the answer to everything.”

What if the rebel tour had taken off? In short, it would have created a civil war in pro surfing. It likely would have turned the brands and surfers against each other. It would have likely killed the women’s tour. At least for a few years. Longboarding would have been more on it’s own then ever. The juniors, well, God only knows. Warring tours would have delegitimized any world champion, making the sport much less desirable to outside sponsors, right at a time it needs them the most. With such a mess, a TV contract would not have helped and probably not lasted. The unique world of pro surfing would have been severely damaged for several years, undermining overall sales for much of the surf industry. Good plan.

Make no mistake, there is blame to spread around on this one. Shame on Slater for allowing himself to get involved in this and swept up in the vitriol. Shame on Hardy and Tinley for a taking such a caustic  approach.  And shame on ASP for allowing issues this important to drag on for so long it took this brouhaha to get them done. Life on tour will undoubtedly get better for surfers next year, at least once they figure out how the new unified tour will work. But why did it take this long?

“At the end of October, we’ll know what is the future of ASP and their tour,” Carr says. “Wherever we go, we go as a group. That’s the goal.”

So, has everyone really learned a valuble lesson here? Has there been a blueprint laid out for change, or better yet, evolution in the future? Enjoy the rest of the season and don’t count on it.

Email