DreamHack Winter 2013
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive championship
The 2013 DreamHack SteelSeries Counter Strike: Global Offensive Championship, also known as DreamHack Winter 2013, was the first Counter-Strike: Global Offensive Major Championship. The tournament was organized by DreamHack and sponsored by Valve. The competition was held during the Winter 2013 DreamHack digital festival at the Elmia Exhibition and Convention Centre in Jönköping, Sweden. Six invitees joined ten qualifiers to form the sixteen team event. Community funding helped to build the US$250,000 prize pool. The tournament had a peak 145,000 concurrent viewers on Twitch and the in-game viewing client.
Format
Six teams – Astana Dragons, compLexity Gaming, VeryGames, Clan-Mystik, Fnatic, and Team iBuyPower – were directly invited to participate in the tournament.
In addition to those six teams, ten other teams qualified through other tournaments. For instance, Ninjas in Pyjamas qualified by winning the DreamHack Summer 2013 tournament; Copenhagen Wolves qualified by winning EMS One Fall 2013; LGB eSports qualified through an online qualifier; and Reason Gaming qualified through the BYOC qualifier.
Teams were split up into four groups, and all group matches were best-of-ones.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “DreamHack Winter 2013” is counter-Strike: Global Offensive championship. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through DreamHack, Winter and Counter-Strike, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “counter-Strike: Global Offensive championship” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 28, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q19278515. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2013.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “DreamHack Winter 2013”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow DreamHack Winter 2013 primary sources, DreamHack Winter 2013 archive and DreamHack research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “DreamHack Winter 2013”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “DreamHack Winter 2013” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.