You are correct that the parents are guessing when they decide a child's sex at birth. Often their decision is influenced by which surgery is simpler or cheaper. Maybe by what they want. I don't know if medicine has advanced where they can tell if a child with ambiguous sexual features will identify as a male or female as they get older.
The African runner that had high levels of testosterone without supplementing had no idea she also had male features until a lot of invasive testing and then some higher tech testing than was readily available when she was younger. I feel sorry for her, her problems were caused by a freak of her development before birth, not cheating which I think she was often accused of. Ultimately I think the rights of the many outweigh the rights of a very few. Not her fault that she produced bunches of testosterone, however it isn't her fellow competitors fault either.
The seventy-five cent question is what amount of testosterone was she producing at puberty? It seems that this is when the biggest advantages are gained in body development. A "win at all costs to the athlete" program like the old east german sports programs could heavily supplement testosterone at puberty then not supplement for years before a competition and still gain most of the advantages that being a male would give.
From my current understanding, somebody that is a real or synthetic male at puberty will carry an advantage throughout their typical competitive years if males have an advantage over females in that form of competition. This seems to hold true for forms of competition where people are over the hill at around thirty or earlier. No idea if it holds true for a pool player's entire career which can last decades longer. That is an issue in these discussions. Without a significant group of pool players we look at examples in other areas and assume they correspond. This may or may not be true.
Hu
. Looking at both the woman and the other. I'd pay money and bet on the real woman in a boxing match.
