Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)

[Harv72b]

I had this situation come up the other day, and thought it might provide for some interesting discussion. After playing out my hands for the day, I decided to play some microlimit crazy pineapple on UB (we're talking .25/.50). The game was unusually chatty and friendly, which was fine with me...during the conversation, I let slip that I normally play hold'em & was just relaxing with this game. One of the other players at the table asked me if I wanted to play some heads up hold'em.

A bit about me--I'm a proven winner at online LHE up through 5/10, over the past year+. I have ventured slightly higher than that at times, up to 15/30, with mixed but far from terrible results. I believe, and other 2+2'ers that I've played have confirmed, that one of my strengths is in HU situations. That, plus having observed this guy's play at crazy pineapple, left me with absolutely zero doubt that I would clean him out in a HU match.

Now, as I said, the game was friendly. I was playing seriously and not donking it up, and there were no ill feelings between myself and the challenger; I believe that he honestly just wanted a friendly HE game. I finally declined his offer after he told me that he only had about $30 in his account--that didn't seem nearly worth the effort to me.

Now, here's where the moral issue comes up: even if he'd said that he had $200, I don't think I would have played him. I had absolutely no doubt that I was the (far) superior player, and while the cards can even the field somewhat, it would have taken nothing short of a miraculous run of cards for him to avoid losing money. But I had nothing against the guy, as he wasn't being an ass at the table or anything like that...I guess you could say that I didn't feel he "deserved" to be beaten.

On the other hand, I recognize that I am taking advantage of worse players every single time I play, many of whom seem like genuinely nice people. This doesn't bother me in the least; nobody is forcing them to play poker, and they are free to walk away from the game at any time (or to improve their game). So, assuming that this guy had had enough money to make it "worth my time", why should it have bothered me to take his money, heads up? In fact, I wound up winning about $5 from him in the pineapple game, and this didn't bother me in the least. However, if this guy had been annoying or abusive at the table, I wouldn't have thought twice about taking him up on his challenge, for $5 or $5,000.

If any of you psych guys can shed a little of your insight as to what exactly is going on (am I just a selective "nice guy"?), and/or tell me what you would do in a similar situation, I'd appreciate it.

Or, just tell me what an idiot I would've been for passing up an easy $200. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]