WTA Genetic Testing Policy: What the New Eligibility Rule Actually Requires

The new WTA genetic testing policy makes the Women’s Tennis Association the latest major sports body to adopt a mandatory, science-based sex-eligibility screen for women’s competition. The policy took effect Tuesday, July 21, 2026, and applies to all players competing in WTA tournaments, including the four Grand Slams.

What the WTA Genetic Testing Policy Requires

Under the updated women’s eligibility policy, players must complete a one-time test — via cheek swab, blood sample, or saliva — screening for the SRY gene, a segment of the Y chromosome associated with male-typical sex development. The WTA is covering the cost of testing.

A positive result renders a player ineligible to compete in the women’s category unless she can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of WTA medical staff, that she has Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome or another recognized Difference of Sexual Development. Players are required to sign a document acknowledging that refusing the test, or competing while known to be ineligible, could result in disciplinary action, including a period of suspension from tour events.

The WTA has stated the policy is meant to “preserve the integrity of women’s professional tennis and maintain fair competition,” and that it carries “no intent to disrespect or question the gender identity or the dignity of any person.” The organization says the eligibility framework — first introduced in 1975 and periodically revised since — was updated after consultation with WTA members and in light of “evolving standards” across women’s sport.

Notably, there are currently no known transgender athletes competing at any level of professional tennis, meaning the policy’s immediate practical effect on the existing player field is unclear.

Part of a Broader Pattern Across Sport

The WTA’s move follows a wave of similar policies across international sport over the past year and a half. World Boxing and World Athletics both introduced SRY gene-testing requirements in 2025, and the International Olympic Committee reversed its longstanding inclusion policy in March 2026, mandating a comparable one-time test for athletes hoping to compete in the women’s category at the 2028 Los Angeles Games. Reporting has linked that IOC shift to a broader policy direction from the Trump administration on eligibility standards in sport, which several international federations have aligned themselves with since.

A Divided Reaction

The announcement — made quietly, via a website update rather than a press release, after being first reported by the tennis newsletter Bounces — has drawn a genuinely split response from players, medical experts, and advocacy groups.

Supporters frame the policy as a straightforward fairness measure. Eighteen-time Grand Slam singles champion Martina Navratilova pushed back publicly on characterizations of the rule as discriminatory, arguing there is nothing wrong with a sex-verification test in women’s sport. World No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka has previously voiced similar concerns about competitive fairness, arguing that biological advantages make it unfair for women to face opponents who hold them.

Critics have raised different concerns. Human rights organizations and some medical experts have questioned both the science and the process, arguing that a single gene marker doesn’t capture the full complexity of human sex development and that the policy could unfairly affect intersex athletes along with transgender ones. Billie Jean King, the 1973 “Battle of the Sexes” champion, has been among the prominent voices defending trans inclusion in sport and describing exclusionary policies as discriminatory. Transgender and intersex athletes who have spoken publicly on the matter have warned that broad testing mandates risk harming women’s sport generally, not just the small number of athletes the policy targets directly.

Where the WTA Genetic Testing Policy Stands Now

As of this week, testing has begun rolling out across the tour, with the WTA describing a “comprehensive player engagement program” running alongside it. The organization has emphasized confidentiality and data-privacy safeguards throughout the process. Whether the policy holds up to legal or governance challenges, and how it interacts with parallel decisions at the Olympic and Grand Slam level, remains to be seen in the months ahead.