Given the punishing training regimen the Williams sisters follow, it is good evidence of biological limits on the boost training can give in tennis. I doubt it has much relevance for creativity.
The original question was asking for an example of a "genetically talented that they didn’t train" losing to someone who was a "pro" and this is clearly not an example of it.
That said, I'm not trying to make the argument that there aren't 'genetic' limits.
My point, more broadly, is that the idea that, “I can’t do that....genetics!” is misplaced defeatism.
But, as I suggested earlier, I don't think the issue of athletic performance has much to say about creativity, which is the topic of this article. Indubitable's answer of Ramanujan is a much more relevant reply to your question, but where does that leave us? His example does not give us a reason to give up on creativity, which goes to show that the question doesn't address the issue.
Let me say that I don't disagree in the advantages of genes and sex, but from my own experience competing at a moderately high level and knowing players who competed at the highest levels, you more or less train with an expectation of what your opponents will do in mind.
At least in badminton, the way men and women play the game is completely different, but I would be very surprised if it's merely due to physical differences. I don't think it's due to physical differences because the difference in style shows up across the skill level, and I imagine a professional female player who consistently did weight training should be able to achieve the same level of strength as a male who isn't nearly as serious.