Regarding steal size in the SB vs a tight opponent, and percentage of hands to open:
I think you guys are making this way more complicated than it actually is. This is a simple preflop math problem that doesn't require any tough calculations. Let's try a few.
All of this is based on memory, so please correct me if you see any errors.
The book states that when your range is primary consisting of steals, you want to ideally raise the smallest amount you can get away with that will be successful. Even tight opponents can convince themselves to call a min-raise or a 2.5x raise to play in position in a HU pot vs a super weak range, so when raising from the SB 3x is usually what realistically gets them to fold a good amount.
So let's say we have a pretty junk hand, like 92o. We have a mega-nit in the BB and it's folded to us in the SB. Our plan is to raise to 3x as a steal. Just based on preflop alone, how often does this have to work for it to be profitable? It's a simple risk vs reward.
It costs us 2.5 big blinds to raise to 3x, since we're already in for 0.5 big blinds. So 2.5 is what we are risking.
Our reward is the current pot. That's 1 for the big blind, and 0.5 for the SB. So our reward is 1.5.
We risk 2.5 to win 1.5. This means that if he folds 62.5% of the time, we break even. Anything more than that and we profit. Surely you guys can find tons of nits who will call or raise your SB steals less than 37.5% of the time, right? If so, you make long term profit and they lose money based on the preflop play, and there is nothing they can do about it unless they stop nitting it up and dramatically change their game plan.
These numbers are completely independent of what happens on the flop. Even if you check folded the flop every single time they called (or fold when they raise), you still win, and they lose. So if you don't want to c-bet, you don't have to. As long as he's folding more than 62.5% of the time preflop, and you aren't spewing money when he doesn't fold, it is mathematically impossible for you to not make money in this spot in the long term. This doesn't even take into account the time we actually have a good made hand, luckbox a flop with our garbage, or the metagame benefit we get from the table seeing us raise so much. So when the book says open any two here as long as he folds about 60%, I can't see you going wrong with this advice.
What happens if we raise to 4x from the SB? Now we are risking 3.5 to win 1.5. He needs to fold 70% of the time for us to show an automatic profit. It's a little less forgiving, but would probably still work great against a lot of tight players. Whatever works best for you and the situation, I suppose.
Bottom line: Until your tight BB starts playing some hands, you can rob him blind by raising to 3x every single time.
This was meant to be a short post, but I like hearing myself talk.
Random side note: I really suck at multitabling. Even just two.