Nasty River Spot: AK good vs Tight Player? (1 Viewer)

[Senzrock]

I'd say V is raising his 2 pair (78s)
Also T9s, some Ax hands.

His sets and pairs probably just like a call.

Here we like to fold.

Lots of good responses, but I especially like this one, because it starts to get at the question of "what on earth is villain actually raising here that makes sense?"

I generally agree that we are beat here on the flop once we get raised, but being behind of course is not in itself a good reason to fold. If we put villain on an 8x for example (98s, T8s, 86s etc), then we have 6 clean outs twice. Putting that hand into the hand calculator, shows us having 22% equity. We have to call $1389 into a pot of $5771 or 24%. That means we would actually be getting (more or less) correct odds to call with AK. If we are against a hand like TT or JJ, our equity jumps up to 24%.

Now could we be in worse shape? Definitely. But those hands are much less likely. I agree with @jebu that most sets just call this flop in position so I am actually ruling most of those out, especially since I think it is only 88 and 77 anyway - very unlikely again. 87s makes a ton of sense for a hand that takes this line and raises the flop. I think we have to put all 87s' in villains range for sure.

Another important question - can we actually be ahead here? I think this is possible as well, though unlikely. I think T9s makes for a very nice min-raise here, hoping to get us off of exactly AK, AQ type of hands. Maybe It even gets us to fold underpairs as well. It would be a good play with T9s to be honest. I still think, given the player, this is less likely, but if we give him 87s, we have to also give him T9s.

All this to say that... if we think most of his sets (and it's hard to hit a set) are just calling the flop, his raising range that is actually ahead of AK in terms of equity, is very very narrow. In the past, this would have been an automatic fold for me. And for good reason. Even if I can make the argument that I have enough equity to call here, is it really worth it? I have no problem with a fold, I think that is kind of the default play here. For me though, I have been trying to spend more time practicing hand reading, especially at the lower stakes where I feel confident enough about making speculative calls to see how that hand reading works out for me. My thinking is, this will allow me to become a stronger hand reader, and overall tournament player at the higher stakes.

My plan here is to call the weird flop raise (and it did strike me as weird right away I have to say), and re-evaluate on the turn (folding many turns but hoping to either hit an A/K or have villain check behind which could give me a lot of information).

What do people think about that plan? Insane? Just not worth it? Something that actually sounds interesting?

 

[Senzrock]

@boltonguy come tell me this is a snap fold!

 

[JMC9389]

Lots of good responses, but I especially like this one, because it starts to get at the question of "what on earth is villain actually raising here that makes sense?"

I generally agree that we are beat here on the flop once we get raised, but being behind of course is not in itself a good reason to fold. If we put villain on an 8x for example (98s, T8s, 86s etc), then we have 6 clean outs twice. Putting that hand into the hand calculator, shows us having 22% equity. We have to call $1389 into a pot of $5771 or 24%. That means we would actually be getting (more or less) correct odds to call with AK. If we are against a hand like TT or JJ, our equity jumps up to 24%.

View attachment 859993

Now could we be in worse shape? Definitely. But those hands are much less likely. I agree with @jebu that most sets just call this flop in position so I am actually ruling most of those out, especially since I think it is only 88 and 77 anyway - very unlikely again. 87s makes a ton of sense for a hand that takes this line and raises the flop. I think we have to put all 87s' in villains range for sure.

Another important question - can we actually be ahead here? I think this is possible as well, though unlikely. I think T9s makes for a very nice min-raise here, hoping to get us off of exactly AK, AQ type of hands. Maybe It even gets us to fold underpairs as well. It would be a good play with T9s to be honest. I still think, given the player, this is less likely, but if we give him 87s, we have to also give him T9s.

All this to say that... if we think most of his sets (and it's hard to hit a set) are just calling the flop, his raising range that is actually ahead of AK in terms of equity, is very very narrow. In the past, this would have been an automatic fold for me. And for good reason. Even if I can make the argument that I have enough equity to call here, is it really worth it? I have no problem with a fold, I think that is kind of the default play here. For me though, I have been trying to spend more time practicing hand reading, especially at the lower stakes where I feel confident enough about making speculative calls to see how that hand reading works out for me. My thinking is, this will allow me to become a stronger hand reader, and overall tournament player at the higher stakes.

My plan here is to call the weird flop raise (and it did strike me as weird right away I have to say), and re-evaluate on the turn (folding many turns but hoping to either hit an A/K or have villain check behind which could give me a lot of information).

What do people think about that plan? Insane? Just not worth it? Something that actually sounds interesting?

If Villain is really as tight as the OP says they are, are they really opening in early position with 7/8, 8/9, or even 9/10 for the open ended straight draw? Unlikely, IMO. I don't think two pair or top or middle pairs are possible here.

Would they raise a suites ace with an 8 or a 7? Unlikely also.

A call against an opponent for which Hero has little information on is ok given that you pointed out that the price is right, but whether I let it go or continue is highly situationally dependent. Bases on hero's read of the Villain, for me, is an easy fold with a reraise.

 

[Senzrock]

If Villain is really as tight as the OP says they are, are they really opening in early position with 7/8, 8/9, or even 9/10 for the open ended straight draw? Unlikely, IMO. I don't think two pair or top or middle pairs are possible here.

Would they raise a suites ace with an 8 or a 7? Unlikely also.

A call against an opponent for which Hero has little information on is ok given that you pointed out that the price is right, but whether I let it go or continue is highly situationally dependent. Bases on hero's read of the Villain, for me, is an easy fold with a reraise.

Even tighter players will raise up suited connectors in the rebuy period of a $40 tournament imo. Will he call a 3bet in position with those hands? I think some of the time, sure.

I know villain pretty well, he is in our regular player pool. He is tight but, like all amateur players, I have seen him take some "unconventional" lines here and there. Overall, I might describe him as a tight/break even poker player, maybe slightly profitable long term, capable of making moves from time to time. While he doesn't seem to like to gamble in poker, he does gamble in crypto/stock market for fairly big numbers (something I have always found fascinating - how those two things can be night + day).

 

[MrCatPants]

What's the table read on hero's style? Does hero ever not C-bet as the pre-flop aggressor? How often?

 

[Senzrock]

What's the table read on hero's style? Does hero ever not C-bet as the pre-flop aggressor? How often?

Table read on hero: Hero has won multiple "championships" (points leader in the standings at the end of the year) - I think 6 out of the 8 years I finished up top the leaderboard. Hero has also won 3 out of the last 4 final tables. I would assume players consider me one of the best players in the pool and think of me as aggressive in playing style. Definitely think players in this group say things like "I put you on AK" all the time, without considering many other options.

 

[Senzrock]

Another question to ask ourselves: If we are folding AK each time, what are we doing with AA, KK, QQ, JJ? Calling? Raising? Why?

 

[Schmendr1ck]

Lots of good responses, but I especially like this one, because it starts to get at the question of "what on earth is villain actually raising here that makes sense?"

I generally agree that we are beat here on the flop once we get raised, but being behind of course is not in itself a good reason to fold. If we put villain on an 8x for example (98s, T8s, 86s etc), then we have 6 clean outs twice. Putting that hand into the hand calculator, shows us having 22% equity. We have to call $1389 into a pot of $5771 or 24%. That means we would actually be getting (more or less) correct odds to call with AK. If we are against a hand like TT or JJ, our equity jumps up to 24%.

View attachment 859993

Now could we be in worse shape? Definitely. But those hands are much less likely. I agree with @jebu that most sets just call this flop in position so I am actually ruling most of those out, especially since I think it is only 88 and 77 anyway - very unlikely again. 87s makes a ton of sense for a hand that takes this line and raises the flop. I think we have to put all 87s' in villains range for sure.

Another important question - can we actually be ahead here? I think this is possible as well, though unlikely. I think T9s makes for a very nice min-raise here, hoping to get us off of exactly AK, AQ type of hands. Maybe It even gets us to fold underpairs as well. It would be a good play with T9s to be honest. I still think, given the player, this is less likely, but if we give him 87s, we have to also give him T9s.

All this to say that... if we think most of his sets (and it's hard to hit a set) are just calling the flop, his raising range that is actually ahead of AK in terms of equity, is very very narrow. In the past, this would have been an automatic fold for me. And for good reason. Even if I can make the argument that I have enough equity to call here, is it really worth it? I have no problem with a fold, I think that is kind of the default play here. For me though, I have been trying to spend more time practicing hand reading, especially at the lower stakes where I feel confident enough about making speculative calls to see how that hand reading works out for me. My thinking is, this will allow me to become a stronger hand reader, and overall tournament player at the higher stakes.

My plan here is to call the weird flop raise (and it did strike me as weird right away I have to say), and re-evaluate on the turn (folding many turns but hoping to either hit an A/K or have villain check behind which could give me a lot of information).

What do people think about that plan? Insane? Just not worth it? Something that actually sounds interesting?

To me, this starts to become a very player-dependent decision after the flop. "A tight player" is too generic to answer things like:
- Will this guy open a hand like A8s or 78s from MP? Will he call a 3-bet with that hand if he knows he'll be heads-up and in position?
- Does he adjust for stack depth and the rebuy period when making these decisions?
- Does he semi-bluff raise ever?
- How much does he adjust for flop texture?
- Will he raise a set for value here, expecting to get calls from overpairs and big aces?

I have "tight" players in my group who will raise with a set 100% of the time on this flop, but never ever have top two here because they aren't calling a big preflop 3-bet with 78s. I have others that can do the same thing with nines or tens, because "I have an overpair and I don't want AK to catch up."

Hell, there's one guy in my group who is "tight" in the sense that he doesn't bluff a lot, but he will raise me for value here with AJ/AQ because he perceives me as hyper-aggressive and tells himself "Schmendr1ck plays so many hands that it's probably just a c-bet and my A-high is ahead."

Absent additional information, I'm probably going to call the raise and re-evaluate on the turn. But if I have history with Villain, that's going to have a very big impact on what I do here.

EDIT: Fixed a couple things. I don't know why I keep saying that Villain was check-raising when he's IP and it's just a raise. I should have eaten a smaller lunch.

 

[Senzrock]

"A tight player" is too generic

For sure - and definitely one of the drawbacks of posting a hand on a forum. I could have written a paragraph about my reads on this player, but I think, in order to get non-biased opinions on the hand, I left it a little broad. Often times our reads at a casino fall into these broader categories, as we rarely play enough with individual players to have more solid reads. My call on the flop, shows (hopefully), that while I consider him a tight player, I also think he doesn't do this much with sets (lot of players slow play sets here, I probably do too on this exact texture), and that he has a bunch of 8x or 7x type of hands that will either slow down or I can catch up to. I think we can also all agree that players, even tight players, do loosen up a bit during a rebuy period. All of these are important factors in my call (doesn't make it a good call, but just to say that these spots have a lot of nuance).

 

[Schmendr1ck]

For sure - and definitely one of the drawbacks of posting a hand on a forum. I could have written a paragraph about my reads on this player, but I think, in order to get non-biased opinions on the hand, I left it a little broad. Often times our reads at a casino fall into these broader categories, as we rarely play enough with individual players to have more solid reads. My call on the flop, shows (hopefully), that while I consider him a tight player, I also think he doesn't do this much with sets (lot of players slow play sets here, I probably do too on this exact texture), and that he has a bunch of 8x or 7x type of hands that will either slow down or I can catch up to. I think we can also all agree that players, even tight players, do loosen up a bit during a rebuy period. All of these are important factors in my call (doesn't make it a good call, but just to say that these spots have a lot of nuance).

Fixed some things in my previous post because I kept saying "check-raise" in spite of the fact that I knew V was IP and it was just a raise.

Anyway, with this additional info, I definitely call and see what happens on the turn. I don't like flatting out of position, but I'm not folding to a click-back, and I'm certainly not raising, so that leaves one option.

If I whiff the turn, I'm probably done with the hand and check-fold. If I hit top pair, I'm torn between a check-call and a donk.

If Villain sees me as overly aggressive or tends to be sticky with draws, I'm going to lean toward a small donk, targeting eights, overpairs, and draws. If I donk and V raises again, I'm sigh-folding.

Otherwise, I'm check-calling with TP.

 

[boltonguy]

Your range is uncapped here and you would play an overpair exactly like this but he’s raising into an uncapped range that is playing like an overpair … do you think he raises like this with AK or TT? I think you’re behind here and am folding but wishing you good luck!!

 

[warma]

Looks like folks are to invested in the action to remember the thread is titled “Nasty river spot,” so…..

 

[Schmendr1ck]

Looks like folks are to invested in the action to remember the thread is titled “Nasty river spot,” so…..

It still doesn't hurt to analyze the rest of the hand before @Senzrock gets coolered on the river.

 

[raynmanas]

agree with snap fold on the flop raise. way too many options for trouble continuing from here, you took your shot and whiffed.

 

[Marius L]

I have pulled this min-raise move when I have a soul read that I'm facing c-bet with pure air. Is villain capable of that type of play?

Agree. I'm surprised we are so scared here and that so many people are auto-folding after that small click-back on the flop. Seems very exploitable if we always c-bet/fold if we miss the flop OOP here. I would expect the other player to have a good amount of floats with single pair hands and also some 9Ts, JTs type hands. Probably also some good Ax as well. I would not be surprised if he raises with some of these as well. He might even raise with something like AQs with a backdoor or whatever to try to get you off the hand. Seems like it would work like a lot of PCFers, so probably a good play, lol.

I dont mind a call on the flop, and would probably mix it up between folding and calling the raise here myself. You have a good amount of equity and the raise is really small, and so we get a good price. I'm not sure we are getting the correct price though, as we will likely have to pay again to see the river. I dont really love this spot and I also dont mind a fold sometimes to the raise on the flop, but I think its just too exploitable if we fold as good as AK here to a single small raise every time.

I like the big raise pre btw, was thinking going to 1000 myself.

 

[raynmanas]

my problem with continuing this hand is that it is vs. a known tight player - ive just seen this angle so many times, its a common tight line with a strong hand. maybe i am not giving "tight" enough credit here, but you generally dont see this kind of move from a tight player that whiffed the flop. against an unknown or aggressive player, i am calling the raise most of the time.

 

[boltonguy]

Agree. I'm surprised we are so scared here and that so many people are auto-folding after that small click-back on the flop. Seems very exploitable if we always c-bet/fold if we miss the flop OOP here. I would expect the other player to have a good amount of floats with single pair hands and also some 9Ts, JTs type hands. Probably also some good Ax as well. I would not be surprised if he raises with some of these as well. He might even raise with something like AQs with a backdoor or whatever to try to get you off the hand. Seems like it would work like a lot of PCFers, so probably a good play, lol.

I dont mind a call on the flop, and would probably mix it up between folding and calling the raise here myself. You have a good amount of equity and the raise is really small, and so we get a good price. I'm not sure we are getting the correct price though, as we will likely have to pay again to see the river. I dont really love this spot and I also dont mind a fold sometimes to the raise on the flop, but I think its just too exploitable if we fold as good as AK here to a single small raise every time.

Well if you're calling here thinking V is doing this light why not re-raise with your uncapped range? Maybe better than calling drawing to 6 outs.

 

[Frogzilla]

3 bet pre maybe a hair on the big side but anything less than 900 is a mistake. I think I go 1000.

I hate playing this hand on this flop. Cbet small and check seem trivially close. I lean check here I think. I dunno

Flop raise is similarly annoying for this size. Bet sizes matter. For this one I might randomize in game 50/50. Or start talking to opponent see if that helps.

 

[Mandos]

My question if we continue here is what do we think V thinks that we have? I'm having a hard time coming up with scenarios where we're not in pretty bad shape unless his image is off.

 

[Senzrock]

My question if we continue here is what do we think V thinks that we have? I'm having a hard time coming up with scenarios where we're not in pretty bad shape unless his image is off.

I tried to break down what I thought was a reasonable range for villain earlier in the thread. Basically, lots of 8x mixed in with a few draws T9s and then few combos of 87s that we are in bad shape against. Against that range, I figured we should be good to call (right on the line).

 

[Senzrock]

BACK TO THE ACTION (last update before tomorrow afternoon when I will finalize this hand history after my morning meetings)

Context:

We are playing in our weekly $40 rebuy tournament that runs Wednesday nights. Two tables, we have all 15 players in still, now nearing the end of the one-hour rebuy period. Generally play is fairly loose during the rebuy period, as are probably most of the rebuy tournaments you all play for friendly stakes. To give a sense of the payouts, 1st: $510, 2nd: $280, 3rd: 170. There is also a points structure for the league.

Hand: 8-handed table, blinds at: 40/80 with a $10 Ante.


Action:

UTG: Folds
UTG+1: Folds
Villain (Tight Player): Raises to 240 ($23,015)
HJ: Folds
CO: Folds
BTN: Folds
SB Hero: ($18,431)
BB: Tight Player ($19,652)

Hero raises to $1100 (out of position, with a hand like AK, I tend to lean on going larger rather than smaller. I don't mind having to fold to a large 4bet here if I really need to. Anything less than 800 here I think is a mistake as we give good odds to any two suited connectors and have to play out of position. I want to make villain pay here for dominated Ax and maybe force him to fold a few small pairs that are ahead of us.

BB: folds
Villain: Calls $1100

Flop ($2360 in the middle):

Hero (SB): Bets $1041
Villain (MP): Raises to $2400
Hero (SB: Calls $1359

Pot: $7160

Turn:

Hero (SB): Checks
Villain (MP): Checks behind

Analysis: This is one spot I think I could have been more creative with my hand. I instinctively check, as is my default when someone raises my flop bet. I almost always do this with my entire range for balance, so I did it here as well. Looking back at the hand, this K should be a scare card for villain and he might elect to check back all of the hands that were beating me before (8x, 7x, TT, JJ, QQ) along with several of his draws, which his flop raise has now bought him a nice cheap river for. With the second diamond coming in, and a lot of bad rivers for hero... should we think longer about leading out on this turn? It's a little funky of course, and l generally don't do it, but I kind of like it I think (not being results oriented I should state). If we check, and villain bets, we are not going to to be folding anyway right? If we check and he checks behind, that could be a bad outcome for us... if we bet and get raised, we would have additional information to go on (now a tight player has raised flop and is saying he is unbothered by the K on the turn and is willing to play for stacks).

Thoughts? After villain checks back, where are we in the hand? Always ahead? Does he ever check back hands that have us beat?

 

[Zr1]

I like a smaller raise pre flop.. i am a big believer in pot control in tournaments. I think people generally Inflate the pot way too much in tournaments. Its a really bad habit imo. Especially with a tight player just makes the rest of the hand kinda awkward to play. Imo pot is just way to big on the flop and the c bet just adds more fuel. if i cbet it would be 700-800 as played. Thats enough for a tight player who misses flop to fold. Im folding flop after getting raised. As played im checking river no matter what comes. If he puts out a small bet id probably call just to see but any thing more than a small bet im folding. A lot of people take this line with a set. Tight player with this much invested just screams that we are beat. I go back to pot control. If we keep it smaller oop preflop we really make the hand play a lot easier for ourselves with way less invested. Its a tournament the chips you save are just as important as the ones you win

 

[RainmanTrail]

Pre flop should be a mixed strategy of just calling and 3 betting. A reraise to ~800 is sufficient. No need to bloat the pot. Pot control is our friend. On the flop, cbet ~1/2 pot is fine. Fold to the raise though. As played though, check/call the K turn. You're usually good here now, but it's expensive when you're not and you won't win much when you are.

 

[warma]

You’ve been assertive, but not overly aggressive, matching V. You don’t have a flush draw at this point. As V, I’d put you on a pair here,

,

,

, probably Kings leading with. Damn.

I don’t see how V has a flush draw, either. V no longer has , I can’t see how someone takes that line with, , or 2 unconnected diamond face cards. Same reason why you don’t have one.

If V had trips or 2 pair, I would have expected V would bet to keep you from improving. Why feign weakness here when it could lead to their demise?

I’m guessing V is repping a pair, either, , , maybe with a now busted straight draw. Probably not Jacks. Even or slightly behind, no longer worth bloating a pot over this early in the tournament.

But then again, I play to gambol, so what do I know?

 

[boltonguy]

I think you are ahead and I think your X to the aggressor on the prior street is standard. I cant see a likely FD here that raises flop and X behind turn unless he is getting funny with 9dTd. More like a concern from V that you have him beat when calling his raise (you are uncapped) - I think if he had a set or 2 pair here he would likely be betting again with the FD coming.

 

[grebe]

Lots of good responses, but I especially like this one, because it starts to get at the question of "what on earth is villain actually raising here that makes sense?"

I generally agree that we are beat here on the flop once we get raised, but being behind of course is not in itself a good reason to fold. If we put villain on an 8x for example (98s, T8s, 86s etc), then we have 6 clean outs twice. Putting that hand into the hand calculator, shows us having 22% equity. We have to call $1389 into a pot of $5771 or 24%. That means we would actually be getting (more or less) correct odds to call with AK. If we are against a hand like TT or JJ, our equity jumps up to 24%.

View attachment 859993

Now could we be in worse shape? Definitely. But those hands are much less likely. I agree with @jebu that most sets just call this flop in position so I am actually ruling most of those out, especially since I think it is only 88 and 77 anyway - very unlikely again. 87s makes a ton of sense for a hand that takes this line and raises the flop. I think we have to put all 87s' in villains range for sure.

Another important question - can we actually be ahead here? I think this is possible as well, though unlikely. I think T9s makes for a very nice min-raise here, hoping to get us off of exactly AK, AQ type of hands. Maybe It even gets us to fold underpairs as well. It would be a good play with T9s to be honest. I still think, given the player, this is less likely, but if we give him 87s, we have to also give him T9s.

All this to say that... if we think most of his sets (and it's hard to hit a set) are just calling the flop, his raising range that is actually ahead of AK in terms of equity, is very very narrow. In the past, this would have been an automatic fold for me. And for good reason. Even if I can make the argument that I have enough equity to call here, is it really worth it? I have no problem with a fold, I think that is kind of the default play here. For me though, I have been trying to spend more time practicing hand reading, especially at the lower stakes where I feel confident enough about making speculative calls to see how that hand reading works out for me. My thinking is, this will allow me to become a stronger hand reader, and overall tournament player at the higher stakes.

My plan here is to call the weird flop raise (and it did strike me as weird right away I have to say), and re-evaluate on the turn (folding many turns but hoping to either hit an A/K or have villain check behind which could give me a lot of information).

What do people think about that plan? Insane? Just not worth it? Something that actually sounds interesting?

This would be worth considering if you didn't say the villain was tight. Your synopsis sounds like a thinking player capable of making moves. Against a TAG or a nit, you are just behind way too much.

 

[grebe]

Turn check seems standard. You could lead here, but I don't think it's the best line. We want to get to showdown now, and we are hoping he had the over pair on the flop we just beat. Check/call the turn, probably the same on the river against a TAG/nit.

 

[Mandos]

I tried to break down what I thought was a reasonable range for villain earlier in the thread. Basically, lots of 8x mixed in with a few draws T9s and then few combos of 87s that we are in bad shape against. Against that range, I figured we should be good to call (right on the line).

My point was more what do you think villain thinks YOUR small blind three bet range is. If he's mostly giving you AA KK AK AQs and a few more broadway combos (something like a tight player's own 3b range...) he should at least have a doubt that his 8x isn't ahead on the flop. If he thinks you'll three bet with a much wider range then he doesn't need to be as strong for his flop play to make sense. Maybe you talked somewhere about Villain's read on Hero, but if so I missed it.

 

[Senzrock]

My point was more what do you think villain thinks YOUR small blind three bet range is. If he's mostly giving you AA KK AK AQs and a few more broadway combos (something like a tight player's own 3b range...) he should at least have a doubt that his 8x isn't ahead on the flop. If he thinks you'll three bet with a much wider range then he doesn't need to be as strong for his flop play to make sense. Maybe you talked somewhere about Villain's read on Hero, but if so I missed it.

Ah misread this, my mistake. I did discuss what I think hero's general image is earlier but you are also getting at something more specific. If villain knows that I have (or should have) all overpairs on the 873 flop, why would he raise any of his 8x? For me, this is a major difference between a "level 2" thinking player and a random poker player. A thinking player *should* give the preflop 3bettor who then cbets flop a strong enough range that any 8x will *always* be a check call, never a raise. A raise with 8x is basically taking the "raise to see where I'm at" approach (personally my least favorite 'play' in poker). To come back to your question, I think that villain should, in theory, be respecting my 3bet from the SB in this spot, having played with me for several years. He knows I am rarely doing this out of position with hands like 65s or 22 for example.

 

[grebe]

I think your big mistake here is the flop call still...and I was just thinking about how to emphasis this. This concept is from Ed Miller's "The Course" and talking about GTO strategies and when they go from GTO against an unknown opponent to GTO to a known opponent. I know I said those bad letters, but bear with me...

-If you are playing against a known opponent that does something either not enough or too much, your response becomes binary (not a mix of this or that). If he bluffs too much, you should call him down every time you can beat his bluffs. If he doesn't bluff enough, you should fold EVERY SINGLE hand that is just a bluff catcher.

-So since you have labeled this player as tight...you should assume he does not bluff anywhere near enough to be balanced. So your response to his raise becomes simple: fold all of your bluff catchers. When he raises, your question should be: can I beat any of his value? The answer on the flop is an emphatic NO. Therefore, we should always fold. Will there be exceptions? Sure....but overall, this EXPLOITATTIVE fold makes us money.