Richard Austin causes World Series stir

[The Buzz]

Poker player Richard Austin caused some controversy this week at the World Series of Poker when he refused to talk to the media after winning a $5,000 Pot-Limit Omaha Event. Furthermore, he refused to accept his gold bracelet at the traditional rewards ceremony.

Aintluck.com has a write-up of the controversy:

Austin’s hiding from the limelight has polarized opinion. Some see his decision as the act of a humble man, opposed to the fame and jazz that engulfs a bracelet winner. Others see it as an act of petty defiance, and an insult to the integrity and traditions of the World Series. Is it against the spirit of competition? Perhaps. But shouldn’t every winner have the right to retain a degree of a anonymity? One would think so. Let’s examine the arguments for and against.

[Anthony]

Interesting story. I understand where he is coming from. If he doesn't want to be in the spot light, that is of course his prerogative. Some people just want to play and not get caught up in the celebrity part of it.

[bbonline]

Interesting story. I understand where he is coming from. If he doesn't want to be in the spot light, that is of course his prerogative. Some people just want to play and not get caught up in the celebrity part of it.

^ Agree. He deserved to be in silent when it comes to the winning matters. I guess he doesn't need to get that bracelet because winning $5,000 is such a big money. Or if he does accept it, it could be better if he sold it and gave it to his chosen charity if he had one.