I am wired to love data analytics. The metrics that provide feedback appeal to the part of my brain that craves understanding of how things work. That mindset definitely applies to training, where performance data can illuminate patterns that may otherwise go unnoticed. For that reason alone, the Whoop band has always been on my radar as a device I would like to experiment with someday.
While wearable technology has become a standard part of elite tennis training, this year, one of those devices was at the center of a minor controversy at the Australian Open. Many players, including Aryna Sabalenka, Carlos Alcaraz, and Jannik Sinner, were prohibited from wearing their Whoop device during matches. That kept them from tracking in-match metrics such as heart rate variability, skin temperature, and blood oxygenation. The Whoop band is approved by the ITF, ATP, and WTA, so the ban at the Australian Open is unique.
Some reports I saw suggested that wearable technology is prohibited by the Grand Slam rulebook itself, but that simply is not true. My review of the 2026 version shows no explicit ban on wearable performance devices. Instead, the restriction resulted from tournament-level policy decisions made by the Australian Open. In other words, this is not a case of players violating a clearly written rule, but rather of event organizers selecting and enforcing a discretionary policy. I suspect that some sort of sponsorship may smooth that over by the time the “Happy Slam” rolls back around next year.
It is also worth exploring why this data matters so much to professional players in the first place. Performance wearables are not about live feedback or in-match coaching. Instead, the data from these devices is primarily valuable for post-match use. Players and their teams use these data to monitor workload, recovery trends, and physiological stress over the course of a match. In a sport as physically demanding as tennis, any insight into load management is not a luxury. Small changes in recovery metrics can signal emerging issues and allow recovery routines to be optimized. Blocking access to that information during competition does nothing to protect competitive integrity. All it does is limit the player’s ability to understand and manage their own physical state.
I have always been highly interested in the Whoop band, but have yet to pull the trigger on purchasing one. Quite frankly, I do not have the bandwidth right now to meaningfully study and interpret that volume of data. That level of analysis requires time, consistency, and attention. For me, deep performance analytics feels more like a post-retirement endeavor, when I will have a little more time to examine my physical performance patterns. For right now, I think the primary insight would be that I am not spending as much time on court or training as I want to. I don’t need a Whoop band to tell me that.
Data only creates value when it is interpreted thoughtfully and acted upon consistently. Collecting metrics without the time or discipline to analyze them risks creating noise rather than insight. For professional players, that analytical burden is often shared with coaches, trainers, and medical staff. For individuals, it requires a deliberate decision about how much information is actually useful.
To be honest, I don’t think that Whoop, Inc is all that upset over the controversy. The Australian Open’s stance generated significant attention for the device, much of it free. It was a hot topic for many of the top players. In a crowded wearable market, that kind of exposure is difficult to buy.
The good news for recreational players is that while the Whoop band was banned at the Australian Open, it is legal almost everywhere else. In addition to being approved by the ITF, they are also in compliance with USTA rules. That means they are fully available to everyday players for sanctioned league and tournament matches. That creates a rare opportunity where recreational athletes have access to training technology that is, at least momentarily, prohibited at one of the sport’s most visible events.
That should not be read as a call to chase professional optimization. Instead, it is an opportunity to think more deliberately about how data can support better decisions. Used intelligently, wearable data can help recreational players manage workload, prioritize recovery, and extend their time on court. In a sport where longevity matters and margins shrink with age, those insights can be valuable.
Fiend At Court participates in the Amazon Associates program and receives a paid commission on any purchases made via the links in this article. Details on the disposition of proceeds are available on the “About Fiend at Court” page.