The Women’s Tennis Association -WTA- has introduced mandatory genetic eligibility screening for players seeking to compete on its women’s professional tour. The policy came into force on 21 July 2026 and requires athletes to complete a one-time test for the SRY gene, normally located on the Y chromosome and associated with male sex development. Screening can be conducted through a saliva sample, cheek swab or blood test and will begin during 2026.
A negative result will normally confirm eligibility for the remainder of the player’s career. If the SRY gene is detected, the athlete will be unable to compete while the WTA conducts a further medical assessment. The player may still be declared eligible by demonstrating complete androgen insensitivity syndrome or another difference of sex development that prevented the physiological effects of male infancy and adolescent puberty. The WTA will cover the cost of the screening and any additional medical testing it requires.
A departure from the previous testosterone-based policy
The framework replaces regulations that allowed transgender women to participate after declaring a female gender identity and maintaining reduced testosterone levels for two years before competing. There are currently no known transgender women active at any level of professional tennis, meaning that the change has not been presented as a response to a particular player or dispute within the tour. The WTA instead describes it as a preventive standard intended to preserve equal athletic opportunities and fair competition.
Eligibility will therefore no longer depend primarily on an athlete’s current hormone levels. The policy defines the women’s category through biological sex and the physiological effects of male development, regardless of legal sex or gender identity. It also establishes that a biological female who has used testosterone or another androgen as part of gender-related treatment must wait four years after the final use before returning to WTA competition. The organisation states that these distinctions are not intended to question any individual’s identity or dignity.
Tennis joins a wider regulatory shift
The decision follows the direction taken by World Athletics and World Boxing, which introduced one-time genetic screening in 2025. Athletics tested 1,015 competitors before its World Championships in Tokyo, while boxing established medical review and appeal procedures for athletes whose initial results require further assessment. The International Olympic Committee -IOC- adopted its own policy for the protection of the women’s category in March 2026, placing genetic eligibility testing at the centre of preparations for Los Angeles 2028.
Tennis nevertheless retains a divided institutional structure. The WTA governs its professional women’s tournaments, but the four Grand Slams operate under separate organisational structures and the Olympic competition falls under the authority of the International Tennis Federation -ITF-. The WTA may recognise an SRY test conducted by another governing body when it considers the result sufficiently reliable, but its policy does not by itself determine eligibility for a Grand Slam or the Olympic Games. Achieving a common testing system will therefore require coordination between the principal organisations responsible for the sport.
Fairness, privacy and the right to appeal
Supporters of the measure argue that the physiological effects of male puberty can produce lasting physical advantages that reducing testosterone does not fully remove. Opponents consider universal genetic screening disproportionate and warn about its consequences for transgender athletes and women with differences of sex development. A test may also reveal unexpected and sensitive medical information, making confidentiality, specialist assistance and protection against public speculation essential parts of the process.
The WTA states that medical information will remain confidential and offers counselling to players undergoing further assessment. Athletes can appeal an eligibility decision, provisional suspension or disciplinary sanction to the Court of Arbitration for Sport -CAS-, although a challenge to the legality of the policy itself must be brought before the relevant courts in Florida. The organisation has established a clearer internal standard, but international sport continues to apply different definitions, tests and exemptions across disciplines. A player’s eligibility may still depend on whether she is entering a WTA tournament, a Grand Slam, an ITF event or the Olympic Games.
About THE IN
THE IN is SportsIn’s Institutional Intelligence System, pioneering a new category of institutional intelligence for sports media by integrating human expertise, strategic reasoning and advanced intelligence technologies into one evolving system.
Last related articles
