Frozen Focus: Standards for Winter Sports

Heads up displays in goggles, carbon fiber hockey sticks, universal bindings. Technological improvements are making their way to your favorite cold-weather sports. Learn how standards support both amateurs and the next generation of Olympic athletes on the latest episode of Standards Impact.

Guests include Earl Saline, director of education at the National Ski Areas Association, and Evangelos Spyrou, manager, research & certification at CCM Hockey.

Follow Us

• Twitter @ASTMIntl
• Facebook @ASTMInternational
• Instagram @astmintl
• YouTube @ASTMIntl
• LinkedIn @ASTM International

Presented by ASTM International

www.astm.org

Transcript

David Walsh (00:12):

Welcome to Standards Impact ASTMs Official podcast. The world just witnessed the pageantry of the 2026 Winter Olympic Games, and from the drama of Lindsay Vaughn's crash in downhill skiing to the excitement of men's and women's hockey. The games did not disappoint. However, underpinning many of the sports the world just watched with such intensity and fascination are standards. Standards for equipment safety, equipment performance, and more. I'm your host, Dave Walsh, editor in Chief of Standardization News, and today we're going to talk about those standards with guests. Earl Saline, director of Education with the National Ski Areas Association, and Evangelos Spyrou, manager, r and d certification with Reebok, CCM Hockey. Earl is a member of the Committee on Snow and Water Sports F 27, and Evangelos is a member of the Committee on Sports Equipment playing Surfaces and facilities F oh eight.

(01:02):

Okay. So every Olympics comes with its share of controversy and newsworthy moments, as we know. And the 2026 Olympics have been no exception so far. I'd say the most dramatic moments so far would have to involve Lindsey Vaughn and the horrific injury she suffered downhill skiing, which everyone has seen multiple times. It looked like she, uh, maybe clipped a flag or something as she came out of the gate. It was just ugly. So knowing Earl's background with the National Ski Areas Association, this question is for him, Earl. Was there any role played by Lindsey Vaughn skis or other equipment in her accident as far as you could tell, could the bindings or any other part of her equipment have somehow, uh, affected her landing for good or bad by any chance?

Earl Saline (01:42):

Well, having seen the same videos that everybody else did, I can't see anything that clearly points to an equipment issue. The speeds that these racers are going, the forces that are being exerted, not just on them, but also their equipment is taken into account by not just the skier, but also the technicians that work on their equipment. And the equipment is set up according to that racer the conditions of the slope during the race that they expect not just the the wax, but other components of that equipment. And, you know, from the video, it, it looks like it was a terrible accident. Um, you know, seeing her arm hooked in the gate is really what contributed to that fall.

David Walsh (02:26):

And even though maybe in this, uh, specific instance, the equipment itself didn't play a role, standards do play a pretty large role in the sport of skiing. Um, I know A STM has standards for things like bindings and goggles. Maybe you could talk a little bit about the role that first that this equipment plays and then that the standards that govern them play.

Earl Saline (02:45):

Absolutely. And A-S-T-M-F 27, which focuses on snow sports and water sports, um, really has a spectrum of standards that talk about the design, the construction, and the function of the equipment that, you know, recreational all of us skiers and snowboarders use on a daily basis. And that includes things like bindings, and it's not just the design of the bindings, but the release characteristics. So the standardization around what a release characteristic for a beginner skier, say, an inter versus an intermediate, or even a more advanced skier, the release characteristics that they choose, that's tremendously important. And it's recognized not just across the US but also internationally. So if a man binding manufacturer in, say, Europe is bringing their equipment into the us, we know it's constructed and built and functions according to a common set of standards, which is tremendously important to us here in the us just strictly from a safety perspective for those recreational skiers that are either buying and using their own equipment or renting equipment at ski areas, maybe in California versus Colorado versus New England.

(04:01):

From a goggles perspective, that's absolutely critical, let alone from the UV protection that a lens might use to the fit and function of the materials used in those goggles as well as the helmets. And helmets are, are critical in many ways. They will not protect somebody in the case of every fall or every incident. But the impact attenuation that a helmet provides is critical to its function. And there are multiple A STM committees that, uh, focus on these different components of what makes up recreational skiing, whether that's F 27 or F oh eight, which focuses in on helmets. There's a multitude of crossover amongst the different committees, really, that are contributing to the safety of the skiing public out there.

David Walsh (04:52):

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding was that not too long ago, there was very little standardization in the field of skiing, uh, particularly with something like bindings. Each manufacturer from what I've been told, had their own model or design for those kinds of things. And now that, that has changed a great deal. Is that correct?

Earl Saline (05:10):

That has changed, and that really contributed to a large decline in the types of injuries we are seeing related to tibia, fibula types of fractures, knee related incidents. And that standardization really helped reduce the volume, the sheer number of injuries that were happening, as well as the, the severity of those injuries. The other newest technology that's come on is related to, um, actually one of the newest Olympic sports ski mountaineering. Many of the touring bindings that were used were built around, or without, I should say, a set standard, let alone the boot and binding interface. There wasn't much in the way of a standardization. Now, within a product line, say a Dina Fit boot was made to fit a d offi binding, but if you introduced another brand of boot into that same binding, it may not function exactly as designed. And that's where within F 27, we have really started to focus in on, and this is true even at the international level, bringing that more in line to the, what we enjoy with, uh, what's called a traditional alpine boot with a toe and a heel piece that are clearly defined.

(06:25):

And the alpine binding, a pure alpine binding is designed to work with that specific type of sole. So where you see the difference coming in from the ski mountaineering side is there's still some variability in there. And the other side of this too is the advent of what we call walk to ride types of soles, kind of those rubber lug soles that are on the bottom of an alpine boot that has become more consistent and more streamlined with virtually every manufacturer having a consistent design that works and functions with the bindings that are compatible with those types of souls.

David Walsh (07:02):

Yeah, it all reminds me very much of the classic story of how standards built a market or changed it for the better. With Beta Max and VHS, I mean, there were only two models of home video, but when they were competing and they had different models and you know, it wasn't working when everyone got on the VHS bandwagon, that's when it all exploded, and you got every different manufacturer making the same compatible materials.

Earl Saline (07:23):

Absolutely. And throw laser disc in the mix too.

David Walsh (07:26):

Yeah. So, all right. Uh, the Olympic event that gets the most attention every year, even more than skiing typically, at least here in the US and I'm sure in Canada, has got to be hockey. And here in the US we've fondly remembered the 1980 team with their upset of the Soviet Union. But the game has changed so much in the last 45 years, and the equipment used is one of the biggest changes. It's just light years ahead of where it was back then, when I can even recall in my lifetime when many players didn't even wear helmets. So I'll direct this question to Evangels, who is with CCM, which I think everybody who's ever attended a hockey game or bought a piece of hockey merchandise knows that brand. What are some of the biggest changes in hockey equipment that you've seen in your career, and what do you consider to be some of the most important standards for the game?

Evangelos Spyrou (08:09):

Equipment today is almost unrecognizable compared to what players wore, let's say, back in 1980s. The biggest transformation has been, of course, the shift from, you know, those heavy, mostly leather based to gear to highly engineered, lightweight composite materials. Helmets, for example, have evolved from, you know, those simple shells with a very basic foam to now what we see as more advanced, uh, multi density energy management systems designed to protect against both linear and rotational impacts. You know, I, I guess everybody remembers, uh, Wayne Gretzky, for instance, wearing, you know, the, that very flimsy helmet that, you know, like wasn't, uh, really very protective. Yes. Uh, it, it gave him a very characteristic look. But of course, uh, that helmet didn't meet any standards, and I'm sure if he faced any serious impact, you know, it wouldn't have done much to protect him. Skates have moved from, uh, stitched leather boots to thermo formable composites.

(09:17):

That offer, of course, uh, far better protection and performance, uh, on the other hand sticks. Uh, well, the aluminum revolution was big, but, uh, carbon fiber has completely changed the game in terms of speed, release and power. Now, when it comes to, uh, the standards from a standards perspective, the most important developments involve, of course, impact performance. We measure, of course, a lot of other things, uh, when it comes to, uh, our protective equipment. You know, that hockey is of course, an equipment heavy sport given the nature of the sport. And of course, we need to be testing a lot of other things for all the equipment that we make. It's not just only about impact performance, but you know, we are looking at, uh, the integrity of the materials. We look at, uh, how standards can help us test all these things better. So in hockey, protective equipment must do two things at once. On one hand, withstand repeated high impacts and remain comfortable and functional for elite performance on the other side. So standards help us ensure that every product, whether for youth or pros, meets baseline expectations for safety without holding back innovation. I think that balance is, of course, very critical to make sure we're doing fair justice to the game.

David Walsh (10:43):

You mentioned carbon fiber, and I'm thinking of materials that go into the making of skis have changed a lot as well. And so it kind of brings me to consider the idea of the issues facing your respective sports in the future. You know, if you look back a few years, as we just mentioned in hockey there, there weren't even helmets and then they got flimsy helmets, and so they had to keep evolving and making new standards for those skis. There were, there were wooden skis in the last 70 or 80 years, which is, you know, there was a tectonic shift there. So for each of you in turn, what do you see as some of the biggest issues or challenges facing your sports in the future, and what new standards are going to be needed for skiing and hockey respectively to meet those challenges?

Earl Saline (11:21):

Evangelists hit many of the same things that are affecting the skiing side as well. When we talk about the materials that are used, the durability of those materials, and then the safety aspect related to the consumers that are using these products. So I would say materials are certainly on manufacturer's minds. They're trying to make equipment that's lighter, that's more user friendly. The testing of that equipment is also a critical component here. And the testing of bindings is a critical component that they're functioning properly and within the specifications that are created around those bindings. And this is especially true not just in the retail environment where I might be buying a set of bindings to put on skis that I will be the only user of. Once they're set, they're pretty well set, but in a rental situation where I, maybe I rent a pair of skis at Palisades in California that I know those bindings are set properly for me, that they function properly.

(12:24):

So that test equipment is pretty critical. And you talk about the evolution of materials years ago, for those that have been skiing for a while, there was a period of time where when you wrapped up the season and you were putting your skis away in the garage for the summer, it was recommended that you release the tension on the springs and the bindings. And that has since changed as better materials have become available. And we don't know what materials will be available in the next 10 years, 15 years, 20 years. And that's one of the things that we are conscious of when we set standards that the standards don't necessarily limit the innovation that we don't know about yet. We want standards created that allow that flexibility and allow that creativity and innovative spirit that is throughout our industry. We wanna see what the next generation of equipment will bring, especially for the consumer, if we can make it more comfortable and more fun for them and safer. At the same time, I think the standards are functioning, uh, as intended. I would agree with a lot of,

Evangelos Spyrou (13:31):

Uh, the points that Earl made. Uh, but for hockey, one of the biggest challenges, of course, is the increasing speed and intensity of the game players are faster, stronger, and of course, using equipment that allows harder shots and harder impacts. This puts pressure on equipment manufacturers and, uh, standards bodies to anticipate, you know, what are the new injury mechanisms, for example, rotational impacts. Sub, sub conceptive impacts are new areas that probably require more, uh, robust, uh, approaches to testing. We also see a growing need, uh, for standards around smart equipment, you know, helmets with sensors or sticks that provide, you know, performance analytics. Once electronics enter the picture, of course questions arise around reliability, the data accuracy, durability, and I would even say even, uh, privacy, um, standards can help ensure these products are safe, consistent, and of course meaningful for

Earl Saline (14:31):

Players. If I can chime in, I think that idea of technology and equipment is really an intriguing topic. How it influences design, its integration into equipment. You know, you mentioned helmets and sensors in the helmets. We've traditionally handled that in the side from a, a testing component as opposed to a retail tool or data component for the retail skier or rider. Now, speed is being tracked through apps on phones, or at one point there were, uh, think of a, a, a stick on puck, if you will, that went onto a pair of skis. So some of that technology is certainly influencing the industry, but we're seeing some of it come through through the phone apps, uh, and maybe some technology included in, in boots that provide feedback to the skier about edge angles or rotational forces or speed or GPS locations. But technology is certainly one of those trends that's impacting all of us.

David Walsh (15:40):

You've both already jumped into the next question because you've been talking about the new technologies and their impact on standards and the standards that will be needed. Evangelist, you touched on the, the materials for sticks, and I can relate to that as a, a dad of baseball players, when they started to go to these carbon fiber baseball bats, the balls were just flying out of parks. I mean, you know, little kids were crushing baseballs. I can imagine the same phenomenon in hockey. So what is one thing, one science fiction type aspect of technology that's coming down the way for your particular sport? I don't know if it's those sensors and helmets or, uh, Earl if you see a different one for skiing, if there's something that's just like the average person wouldn't think is on the way

Evangelos Spyrou (16:21):

I mentioned advanced materials, but I think another area is additive manufacturing. You know, like we have been, uh, doing custom helmets for a while now, and 3D printing is, uh, something that is out there, but custom fit requires a little bit of a different approach when it comes to standards. How do you, uh, certify a product or test it so that it covers all those possibilities that exist with customization. So there's been some effort to in that direction, but I think there's more work to be done. And how can standards, you know, accommodate those, uh, developments in the industry? And of course, all these will require new and updated standards, maybe, uh, especially around the validation of data driven equipment, you know, durability, sensor calibration, all these things, uh, is something that, you know, like manufacturers, uh, maybe speaking in a different language. And we need to, you know, standardize the way we do that.

Earl Saline (17:26):

The one area where I could see the, call it the Star Wars future is heads up displays and helmets, or even in goggles where there is, you know, certain data that's displayed, whether it's location, it's speed, it's weather, certain components that sometimes people capture through their smartphone screen right now. Uh, certainly there are, you know, location sharing. There are a, a ton of apps out there for individual ski areas that talk about, okay, here's where you are. Here's where to go get your next burger. Or this lift is down, but this one is opening up. So some of that information coming through more of a think of a heads up display type of product for a skier or a rider. Now, when we talk about using phones in a augmented reality type of application, we joke about somebody skiing down the hill, holding their phone up in front of 'em to get that same information. But what does it look like when all of a sudden that's displayed on the, the lens of their goggles or the visor of their helmet if they happen to have an integrated advisor? That to me, is, is where the future really starts to, to show itself. Now, some of that is already possible. Uh, so the, I'd say the future's here, but it's not adopted in a, any large mass market type of format yet.

David Walsh (18:48):

Those were great answers. I didn't anticipate those technologies coming down the pike from screens and seeing, you know, inside your helmet, computer displays and additive manufacturing for hockey sticks and helmets, things like that. It raises the question, will your committees have to work with other committees on the standards in the future? Because I imagine the expertise for displays and computer displays may not exist in F 27 with the, the Winter Sports Committee and additive manufacturing expertise may not exist in F FO eight, which is the, the sports committee. So what kinds of collaborations do you think there will be down the road?

Evangelos Spyrou (19:25):

I think it's gonna be very important, because that's one of the key things about a standards creating body like A SDM, is that they bring consensus, right? And that basically takes a lot of different perspectives, whether it's, uh, manufacturers, researchers, uh, uh, even clinicians, uh, governing bodies and the users, everybody has their own unique perspective that, uh, of course not everybody can cover everything. You know, nobody has the knowledge on everything. And bringing all these different perspectives, I think is, uh, is very important because it ensures that the standard will reflect science, real world use, uh, the engineering of things. And of course, any constraints, you know, like practical constraints that, let's say the, the game of hockey, the sport of hockey will have to address to make sure that it's, it's fair to everybody. It will be safe, but it's also gonna allow the game to be played the way it was meant to be played. So, uh, I, I think it plays a, a very key role that many people are involved in this process.

Earl Saline (20:37):

And I would echo what Evangels just said. The collaboration is only gonna become more critical. I agree fully with the structure of the individual committees focusing on their areas of expertise, but the crossover is only increasing. And we are fortunate within F 27 that we have also members that sit on F 24, which is amusement rides and devices. And for me, in particular in the association, I work for our member areas, the ski areas around the country live in both worlds. So skiing and snowboarding, absolutely that aspect, they're affected by the F 27 standards, but there's also an effect from F 24 when you look at adventure attractions, aerial adventure attractions, such as zip lines or mountain coasters, or even dry slides and snow tubing at a ski area. So the crossover is, in my mind, only increases, and that's gonna require greater levels of communication and just awareness of what each other is doing. I don't know exactly what that looks like, but that, that crossover and that collaboration just necessitates a greater level of communication.

David Walsh (21:50):

That was an interesting segment because I'm now picturing a, a skier with a display in front of his or her eyes, like the terminator in the future or something like that, so mm-hmm <affirmative>. <laugh>, maybe that's when I'll be more comfortable doing it. I'll feel like I, uh, I can do it better. So.

Earl Saline (22:05):

Well, and the key in that is that that data display doesn't become a distraction. I mean, skiing and snowboarding require a tremendous level of concentration to not just what you are doing is the individual, but the terrain around you, the people around you, similar to driving a car, you can't let that heads up display, distract you from the fundamental task of driving your vehicle at, you know, multi-thousand pound piece of equipment down the road, not putting yourself or anybody else in harm.

David Walsh (22:37):

So we have touched on briefly the A STM process and the standards development process and potential collaborations between committees. We've been discussing all of these things, but from an overall macro standpoint, in each of your fields, how important do you think a STM as an organization has been in creating the standards you need for your sports and sports specifically? How important has the consensus process been in writing these standards and publishing these standards? Has it streamlined it? Has it helped in any way?

Evangelos Spyrou (23:07):

Yes, as I I mentioned, it is foundational to have this, we need to be able to bring all the expertise in place and consider everything so that the standard, as I said, reflects the reality. It reflects good science and how it's being used in the world. So, you know, for sports like, uh, hockey and skiing where safety equipment is mandatory and injuries can be quite severe, I think, uh, the whole process ensures that standards are rigorous, but also adapt to, uh, how the sport evolves too. And I think it has changed. And I think, you know, there have been improvement and changes that reflect those, uh, evolving matters. So of course, the openness of the process is also, uh, something that will build trust. I think, uh, it's important for athletes and parents, uh, uh, that often, you know, don't know the details of a standard, but, uh, they trust that A SDM standards, uh, means something meaningful, and of course it's independent and it's not being influenced by one interest or the other. So I think, yes, this is a process that's very, very critical to, uh, a good standard.

Earl Saline (24:30):

I would agree. And the consensus process is critical in the success of and use of any of the standards, the, the real world application of them. And, you know, I brought up the, the lower limb injury reduction earlier, and that to me is one of the, the great success stories that we've been able to reduce the amount of injuries to keep skiing as safe as it is. And that required the participation of the manufacturers. It required the participation of the retailers that required the participation of the ski areas in all of that. And to trust that when somebody picks up a boot at a store in the northwest to the southeast, and they look, you know, the, the boot sole itself is built to the same specifications is critical. And that required ski manufacturers, the boot manufacturers to have a seat at the table. And while one may have had its quote unquote secret sauce for how it designed its boots for them to agree with their manufacturer across the table that this is the boot sole for an alpine boot, these are the dimensions, these are the acceptable dimensions, this is when it's out of spec.

(25:43):

If it's a rental boot, those demonstrate the consensus pro process really working. And that is incredibly important for the consumer, for our industry. 'cause like Angelo said, the consumer doesn't necessarily know the difference. They're trusting that a product when they buy it will work as intended. And that to me is one of the hallmarks of what the A STM process as it is.

David Walsh (26:09):

And in that sense, I think this is a good example. You're from a society that works in this industry, and, uh, Evangel is from a manufacturer who works in his industry, and having those different stakeholders together with the different perspectives can really help, I imagine. Well, we're coming to the end of our time, but we did wanna get to one question that we always review with our speakers, and basically it, it involves the next generation of standards professionals, which A STM is always interested in cultivating. So what would each of you say to a young professional starting out in your field in terms of engaging A STM and the world of standards? Has it helped your careers and has it been worthwhile? And I, I did want to add that these are probably two fields where you do get a lot of interest from young professionals, because everyone knows the NHL, everyone knows skiing, everyone knows the Olympics. So you probably do get a lot of inquiries from, you know, younger people in your fields.

Evangelos Spyrou (27:01):

Absolutely. I think it's, uh, very important that, you know, like engineers and researchers get involved, uh, early, uh, standards gives you a unique point of view. I think you can see, you know, the future of your industry. You collaborate, of course, with the experts that you wouldn't normally meet in your day-to-day work. And of course, uh, you would learn, uh, how engineering, I guess, policy, end user needs intersect. I think that's a key, uh, learning there. I guess from my own perspective, uh, I think it's been enormously valuable. It has pushed me to stay on top of, uh, new technologies. Has of course helped me build, uh, networks across the industry, across other industries too. It, it has given me opportunities to contribute in ways that go beyond product development. Of course, you know, like it's, uh, one thing to, uh, be within, uh, one lab and, uh, the walls of your own company, but you know, when you could go get out there, of course it, it opens your eyes and it gives you, uh, a little bit of a different, uh, ecosystem. So definitely it has, uh, it's been absolutely worthwhile. And you're not just learning standards, you're, you're helping of course define them. So I think it's, uh, it's very fulfilling, uh, work

Earl Saline (28:24):

Echoing much of what Evangel said. My seat's a little bit different in that as the trade association for ski areas and the suppliers that support the industry. A STM has been a, an amazing experience from the perspective of increasing my network of people involved in the industry. And that has allowed me to learn so much more about the industry than just what I knew coming out of the ski area side of it. The fact that A STM standards influence and impact the operations at an area, I would absolutely encourage anybody coming into the industry to learn where those impacts are, how those impacts have positively affected the guest experience. You can't discount any of that. The career side of it, for me, the, just the exposure and the learning to so many other experts in the industry has helped me be better at my job and my role as director of education for NSAA, it provides additional perspectives that you don't get if you stay just within your own little silo, if you will.

(29:31):

So I've truly enjoyed the, the people, the friends that I've made through my involvement with A STM, the exposure to new and different ideas, the exposure and the opportunity to have an influence on the industry is extremely rewarding. And the fact that it's done in a collaborative environment, it's not one person saying this is how it has to be, but it's the collective intelligence of everybody involved that really helps us create the best standards possible, all with that eye towards the safety of the, the participants. I really respect that. That is, at the end of the day, really the lens that all of us kind of hold ourselves to is if what we're doing is making it the sports safer, then we're doing the right things.

David Walsh (30:19):

Well, I think that's about all we have time for today. We could keep talking hockey and skiing for a very long time, I think, without running out of interesting things to talk about. But I just wanted to thank the two of you for making time for us and being with us today, and we really appreciate you being here.

Earl Saline (30:33):

Thank you.

David Walsh (30:34):

My pleasure. Thank you. If you wanna learn more about any of the standards discussed in this episode, visit astm.org for all the latest. And if you enjoyed the show, remember to like and subscribe so you never miss an episode. I'm Dave Walsh, and this has been Standards Impact presented by A STM International.