Purohit and Chlodnicki keep Washington’s doubles title route open.

Rain City Sports editorial desk | Recap and analysis | October 19, 2026

Washington’s remaining opportunity at the ITA Northwest Regional shifted to doubles on Sunday, October 18. Soham Purohit and Jan Chlodnicki advanced to the semifinals in Seattle with an 8–7(1) victory over Cal’s Lenn Luemkemann and Paris Pouatcha.

The win kept the pair in contention for a regional title and the associated NCAA doubles qualification opportunity described in UW’s official report. It did not qualify them by itself. A semifinal and, if successful, a final still stood between Washington and that outcome.

A close match, a decisive tiebreak

The 8–7 score describes how little separated the teams through the main part of the doubles quarterfinal. The tiebreak score was more emphatic: Washington conceded only one point in that deciding segment.

Those are two different pieces of evidence. The pair had to remain competitive long enough to reach the tiebreak, then execute effectively once the match narrowed to a shorter contest. Neither element should disappear from the account simply because the final segment looked comfortable.

Purohit’s singles day had two outcomes

Before the doubles result, Purohit beat Cal’s Andrea Meduri 3–6, 6–1, 6–4 in the singles round of 16. He later lost to Stanford’s Nicholas Godsick 6–3, 3–6, 6–0 in the quarterfinals.

The sequence added to an already substantial tournament workload. It also gave Purohit a different outcome in each event: the end of his singles run and another step forward alongside Chlodnicki.

UW’s other remaining singles players, Luis Carvalho, Nikola Plavsic and Stephane Kamendje, were eliminated in the round of 16. The doubles pair therefore became the focus of the school’s Sunday progress report.

What the published account establishes

Washington’s recap documents the results and the next pairing. It does not include a player or coach quotation about the team’s physical condition or tactical plan. The match scores cannot supply those explanations on their own.

It would be especially speculative to diagnose the reason for Purohit’s final singles set from the scoreline. The verified account supports saying that he played several demanding matches; it does not establish an injury, a fitness limitation or a decision to prioritize doubles.

What needs to improve: our analysis

The next challenge is making decisive-point execution available throughout the match, not only in the final tiebreak. A strong deciding segment shows the partnership can produce under pressure, but the semifinal will begin with a fresh opponent and no credit carried over from Sunday’s closing points.

Doubles also requires a shared response when an opponent changes the problem. The next useful decision may involve the return position, the first volley or the partner’s movement. Consistent communication keeps those choices connected rather than leaving two players to solve the same rally separately.

Those are general editorial priorities, not a report of Washington’s private preparation. The quarterfinal result is encouraging because the partnership found an answer when it needed one. The task now is to repeat that quality without depending on the same match pattern.

Expectations and what comes next

UW lists Purohit and Chlodnicki against Stanford’s Hudson Rivera and Godsick at approximately 1 p.m. Pacific on Monday, October 19. The winning pair advances to the doubles final.

For Washington, watch the early service and return games and the pair’s response to the first difficult stretch. A regional semifinal is a meaningful opportunity, but the appropriate expectation is competitive execution rather than a qualification already assumed.

Sunday preserved the route forward. Monday will determine whether the Huskies can extend it.

Sources

• Washington Athletics — Official October 18 results and October 19 order of play (checked 2026-10-19)
• Washington Athletics — Men's tennis schedule (checked 2026-10-19)

Analysis and recommendations are the editorial desk’s interpretation. Reporting and attributed perspectives are linked above. Information is current as of the publication date.