Sabalenka and Pegula back new WTA rules, Gauff warns of consequences of debate
TORONTO – The new eligibility policy for participation in the women's competition on the WTA Tour, which came into effect on July 21, 2026, prompted the first more extensive reactions from leading female tennis players during the National Bank Open in Toronto. Aryna Sabalenka and Jessica Pegula said they had no problem with the introduction of mandatory genetic screening, while Coco Gauff accepted the argument that sports organizations want to protect fairness in women's competition, but at the same time warned about the way the public debate spills over onto transgender people. At the heart of the new rules is a one-time test for the presence of the SRY gene, a genetic marker typically located on the Y chromosome and associated with the development of testes. The WTA says the purpose of the policy is to establish a clear eligibility standard, preserve the integrity of women's professional tennis and ensure a level playing field. The debate has gained additional significance because the International Olympic Committee adopted its own policy for the women's category in March 2026, which will be applied for the first time at the Los Angeles 2028 Olympic Games.
Sabalenka: She sees the rule as a matter of competitive fairness
Sabalenka, the top-ranked player in the WTA standings ahead of the Toronto tournament, clearly supported the new approach. At a press conference during the National Bank Open, she said she views the issue primarily through the equality of conditions on the Tour and that she is willing to take the test if the WTA asks her to do so. Her reasoning is based on the view that physiological differences associated with male sexual development can affect athletic performance and that the women's category therefore must have clearly defined criteria. Sabalenka also stressed that her main focus remains on her own sporting goals and that she does not consider the new procedure an obstacle for players. According to her remarks reported from Toronto, the WTA made a decision after lengthy consideration that she considers fair.
Jessica Pegula took a similar, but less categorical tone. The American tennis player said she sees the new policy as an attempt by the WTA to update existing rules in line with changes already implemented by other sports organizations. She said she personally has no objections to the procedure and that she has not heard any significant resistance to the new system among the players. Pegula's reaction therefore differs from Sabalenka's primarily in tone: while Sabalenka explicitly highlighted the issue of physical fairness, Pegula treated the change above all as a regulatory and administrative adjustment.
Gauff supports protecting fairness but calls for more nuance
Coco Gauff offered a more complex response after her appearance in Toronto. The two-time Grand Slam champion said she understands the argument that sports organizations want to protect fairness in women's competition, but warned that the same issue is often used in public discourse to create hostility toward the transgender community. According to an Associated Press report, Gauff emphasized that she simultaneously supports transgender people and the need for rules that preserve fairness in sport. Her emphasis was not only on the test itself but also on the political and social environment in which it is discussed. She believes it is possible to discuss sports eligibility criteria without turning the entire issue into an attack on a group of people.
Gauff also raised the issue of communication between the WTA and the players. She said some tennis players learned about the new policy only when it was publicly announced and assessed that the process could have been more transparent. This is an important detail because the WTA states in the executive summary of its policy that the latest review included consultations with members of the organization and that implementation will take place alongside a program of player engagement and information. Those two claims are not necessarily mutually exclusive: consultation with part of the membership does not mean that every player had been informed in advance about every detail. Still, Gauff's reaction shows that the manner of implementation will be almost as important as the rule itself, especially because sensitive medical and genetic data are involved.
The Associated Press also noted that it is currently unclear how many, if any, transgender women compete at the Olympic level or on the WTA Tour. For that reason, the debate is not centered on a publicly confirmed current case at the top of women's professional tennis, but on a general eligibility standard that the WTA wants to apply prospectively. That circumstance further explains the different emphases in the players' reactions: some view the rule preventively, as protection of the category, while others warn about the broader social consequences of the way the issue is presented.
What exactly the new WTA policy stipulates
The WTA's official document shows that the new policy is not simply a rule under which a positive or negative test automatically ends the entire process. Every player who wants to compete at WTA tournaments must demonstrate eligibility through screening for the SRY gene, and the sample can be taken from saliva, a swab from the inside of the cheek or blood, or by another method determined by the WTA. If the result is negative for the presence of the SRY gene, the player is eligible to compete and, unless there is reason to suspect an error in the result, the test is not repeated again during her lifetime. If the result is positive, the player is not automatically considered permanently excluded, but instead undergoes an additional medical assessment. The WTA rules provide rare exceptions for certain conditions of sexual development, including complete androgen insensitivity syndrome, if it is determined that the person has not undergone the physiological effects of male early or adolescent pubertal development as defined by the policy.
The document also specifies that the WTA may recognize a reliable SRY screening result conducted by another sports governing body or an appropriate third party. This opens the possibility that an athlete who has already undergone an appropriate test in another system may not necessarily have to repeat the same procedure. At the same time, refusal to be tested or failure to cooperate in the process may lead to ineligibility to compete, and the WTA retains the possibility of disciplinary measures. Possible consequences listed include a warning, a specified period of ineligibility, exclusion from a tournament, disqualification of results achieved while the player was ineligible and a financial penalty. The rules, however, explicitly state that medals, titles, prize money or points belonging to other players will not subsequently be redistributed solely because an opponent is later declared ineligible.
The new policy also contains specific provisions on confidentiality. The WTA says that screening results, medical assessments and other data obtained during the process will be treated as sensitive personal data and stored in accordance with applicable privacy laws. The organization has committed not to use such information outside the purpose of implementing the policy or disclose it to third parties except when necessary to apply the rules or when required by law. In the event of an assessment process, players may be offered professional counseling, while the cost of the SRY screening itself and any additional medical tests requested by the WTA is borne by the organization. Decisions on ineligibility, provisional suspension or disciplinary consequences may, under the conditions set out in the policy, be challenged before the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
WTA says this is a continuation of a long-standing eligibility policy
In its official summary, the WTA notes that an eligibility policy for the women's competition has existed since 1975 and has been periodically changed over the decades. The latest version was approved by the WTA Board following a review that, according to the organization, took into account developments in international sport, consultations with members and new standards in women's competitions. The policy that came into effect on July 21, 2026 replaced the previous version and now explicitly ties eligibility to the definitions of biological sex set out in the document. At the same time, the WTA emphasizes that it distinguishes between biological sex and gender identity solely for the purpose of applying the rules and that the intention is not to question anyone's gender identity or dignity. The document further states that disparaging a player, questioning her eligibility based on appearance or harassing her because of deviation from gender stereotypes may constitute a serious violation of the code of conduct or safeguarding rules.
That provision is particularly relevant in light of Gauff's warning. On the one hand, the WTA establishes a stricter medical criterion for entry into the women's category, but on the other it formally prohibits stigmatization and harassment of players based on appearance and gender stereotypes. In practice, the success of the new policy will therefore also depend on whether the organization can keep the medical procedure confidential and prevent public speculation about individual players from turning into a form of pressure or harassment. The WTA has committed in its rules not to comment publicly on individual cases except when responding to public statements made by the player herself or her representatives. This is intended to reduce the possibility that the verification procedure itself becomes a public spectacle.
Los Angeles 2028 has set a new framework for Olympic sport
The broader context of the change comes from the International Olympic Committee. The IOC Executive Board adopted the Policy on the Protection of the Female Category in Olympic Sport on March 26, 2026, which will apply from the Los Angeles 2028 Games onward and will not operate retroactively. According to the IOC's official explanation, the rule applies to individual and team sports at events under its authority, and eligibility for the women's category is determined in the first instance through a one-time SRY screening. Athletes with a negative result permanently satisfy that criterion unless there is reason to believe the finding is erroneous. For a positive result, limited exceptions related to rare conditions of sexual development are provided, similar to the mechanism the WTA incorporated into its own policy.
The IOC explains its approach as protecting fairness, safety and the integrity of women's sport and says the new policy is based on scientific evidence and expert medical advice. The LA28 rule effectively means that the issue of SRY screening will arise outside tennis as well, regardless of how individual professional leagues regulate their own competitions. The Associated Press reported that similar checks have already been accepted or implemented by governing bodies in athletics, skiing and boxing. The WTA's alignment is therefore not an isolated decision but part of a broader change in eligibility criteria in international elite sport.
The rules have received both support and criticism outside tennis
The new Olympic framework has not been accepted without challenge. Human Rights Watch said after the IOC's decision that mandatory genetic testing of all female athletes raises questions of discrimination, privacy, informed consent and the treatment of women with variations in sex characteristics. The organization also warned of historical examples of misclassification in earlier sex verification systems and believes that sports bodies must take into account the medical and human rights consequences of such rules. On the other hand, United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls Reem Alsalem publicly welcomed the IOC policy, arguing that a clear women's category protects fairness and safety. The differing reactions show that the dispute is not limited to the technical issue of a laboratory test, but also encompasses a conflict between different interpretations of sporting rights, inclusivity and protection of the competitive category.
For the WTA, the key issue will therefore be how the rule functions in real cases. The policy itself provides for periodic reviews to take account of new scientific, medical and other knowledge, as well as stakeholder feedback. This leaves room for future amendments if implementation reveals problems that the current document did not anticipate. At the same time, the rule's entry into force means that the debate is no longer theoretical: players who want to compete at WTA tournaments will have to cooperate with the eligibility verification process when called upon by the organization. The statements by Sabalenka, Pegula and Gauff show that there is currently no single way in which leading female tennis players interpret the change, although all three accept that the issue of fairness in women's sport must be taken seriously.
Toronto thus opened a debate that is very likely to follow women's tennis and other Olympic sports all the way to Los Angeles 2028. Sabalenka emphasized the protection of equal conditions, Pegula a regulatory update without major resistance, and Gauff the need to take into account the social consequences and the way the issue is communicated alongside sporting rules. It is precisely this difference in emphasis that is important for understanding the entire dispute: support for fair women's competition does not automatically mean agreement on every part of the procedure or on the way transgender and intersex people are discussed in public. How the new rules will be applied in practice, how confidential the process will remain and whether the WTA will succeed in convincing players that they are sufficiently informed will be among the main questions after the initial phase of implementing the policy.
Sources:
- WTA – official Women's Eligibility Policy, rules on SRY screening, medical assessment, privacy, costs and appeals (link)
- WTA – official page with rules and the current women's eligibility policy (link)
- Associated Press – report on Coco Gauff's remarks in Toronto and her warning about hostility toward the transgender community (link)
- Associated Press – report on the introduction of WTA genetic screening and its connection with Olympic criteria for Los Angeles 2028 (link)
- IOC – official Policy on the Protection of the Female Category in Olympic Sport and criteria that will apply from LA28 (link)
- Human Rights Watch – criticism of mandatory genetic testing of female athletes and questions of privacy, discrimination and medical ethics (link)
- OHCHR – statement by UN Special Rapporteur Reem Alsalem supporting the IOC's new policy on protecting the women's category (link)
- New York Post – report from the press conference in Toronto and Aryna Sabalenka's position on the new WTA policy (link)
- Tennis365 – report on Jessica Pegula's position toward the WTA's new procedure and players' reactions in Toronto (link)