We absolutely crush the flop. Think I like calling it from there. Betting turn seems fine aswell. I'm calling river here all day because all draws (both straights and flushes) brick out. No need to raise him though.

The steal attempt is fine with K7o.

On the flop you're facing a nasty spot if the villain is tight. You might have two pair but you're beating nothing that he legitimately raises for value, and his draws have good equity. This is really player dependant. Calling is fine given the positions involved, if you believe that villain is bluffing enough. But at these stakes, that's a possible long shot. Don't get drawn into thinking that just because you have two pair you're crushing here.

On the turn I would bet a similar size to what you did.

On the river I thinking calling once both draws miss must be fine. His line is weird and makes no sense, make a note if you have time and onto the next hand.

I ended up just calling as you mentioned! He turned up with KJ Damn check on turn threw me off haha

Thanks for reply I ended up calling, he indeed took a very weird line! KJ =/

Call river and it's well played. It sucks when he ends up with KJ but unless he is 100% for value it's not going to happen that often.

Given that you have a K and a 7 there are 6 combos of KJ and 1 combo of 77 that he could have for value. If he ever takes this line with QT which is an open ender and the bluffs then it misses then that is 16 combos meaning over 2/3 of his hands are bluffs. That's massively profitable for you. That's only one bluff hand too, there could be several plus potentially some worse hands for value like J7 as well.

Call river should be good pretty frequently when the draws miss. I'd be getting this in on the flop, so many draws he can have and we block his only possible set 77.

I think you played it well, I probably would've played it very similarely. The only problem is if he doesn't check raise bluff like @Turlock said.

@Archinator I don't think I ever get this in on the flop since:
1. PSR is not good enough.
2. We fold out most od his bluffs (if he has them)
3. We block his value range, so he's calling with what's left of it and folding EVERYTHING else.

The only exception is if I know he's a fish and is getting it in very light.

Can he not call a draw? @scraper420
and if he's weighted say 80% to bluffs do we not want to get as many gets in as possible?
if he folds all his draws then we should be 3b bluffing here relentlessly

He can have combo draws pair + outs so two pair is more vulnerable than a set. But to be fair we have the 2nd nut 2 pair and block the only pair + f-draw that can c/r and beat our 2 pair.

All I'm saying you literally can't get it in good on this flop vs a worse hand because he would have to 4bet shove vs our 3bet and if he does that he doesn't have a worse hand than ours.
If he has a pair + FD and is close to a decent player he is just calling the 3bet here and realizing his equity. And if you know he has 80% bluffs in this spot get it in all day I still don't think he wants to get it in with those, so why make a worse hand fold when you can make it bluff? He does get there sometimes but nothing you can do about that then.

If we think he's only coming over the top with better we can just fold.

We're not bluffing here we're betting for value against a range that is weighted to draws. c/c route is also fine as two pair isn't too vulnerable as we have 2nd nut 2 pair and a K on the flop (the smaller the two pair and lower the board the more vulnerable it becomes).

A good player should look to c/r pair + FD as he has more equity.

The problem with the c/c route what do we do when a A,9 or diamond hit?
Villan can therefore bluff other draws so we're probably going to make mistakes against his hand.

So by 3betting either:
1) he calls and we fire turn and get a nice check back on the riv
2) he comes over the top with a set and we fold -unless we're bluffing here and know he has some 4b bluffs
3) He folds a draw and a ton of equity
4) He has KJ presuming 77 shoves and we value cut flop and turn

If we go for a call either:
1) He has a strong hand and we pay of 3 streets on bricks
2) He has a draw and we get paid three streets on bricks (if he doesn't give up)
3) A draw completes and we fold (sometimes incorrectly)
4) A draw completes and we call (sometimes incorrectly)

Both are going to be +EV but I think from the outcomes I've listed there 3betting looks a lot more attractive.
If you know he's folding all his draws then calling is best and we should be bluffing this spot pretty often with hands that don't block draws and with weak pairs that block value hands.

Very interesting response! Thanks!

How much would you 3bet to? To make sure there's room to fold to a shove?

So we're playing 0.03/0.06 and we're talking ab out 3bet folding 2 pair on the flop?

Sounds a bit 'pokerish' for this limit to me.
I'd be calling the raise flop, chk behind turn, call river. Use a bit of pot control we haven't got the nuts here imo.

..but then I'm a nit...

I would 3bet 3x. That should give us enough room to fold to a jam.

We basically force him to tell us if he's massive. A good comparison would be 3betting AQ.

If CO and we 3b AQ from BTN and we know he 4bets AK then we don't lose loads of our stack when an A comes.
We fold out weak hands with equity. (in this case either charge hands to draw or fold them out)
We take control of the pot and force him to play passively as we have a strong range (i.e we get of bluffed less).

IMO it just makes playing post flop so much easier and more EV.

Limitations of this approach are:
He never bluff raises- so we're burning money
A bad card comes on the turn we check back and he bombs the river and we fold (sometimes incorrectly, but he's less likely to do this with a bluff when we're repping a super strong range)

Here's a visualisation of what I think a 6nl BB defence looks like. This assumes that he raises draws and sets at the same frequency which isn't true so you can adjust for this.

Yes that range is super draw heavy but by 3betting you're forcing villain to narrow his range. If, for example, you drop only the open enders which is very reasonable to fold to a 3bet then K7 is behind villain's range whether he shoves or calls which should not be your intended goal when 3betting flop. I would prefer to flat the flop raise unless villain has shown that he's pretty nutty.

Interesting points @Komododragonjesus . After thinking about it some more IMO the decision as to weather to 3bet really comes down to:
1)is our opponent aggressive
2)how well we we can play the turn and the river i.e is readable or passive

i.e We're going to make some big folding mistakes if he's an aggressive player or some big calling mistakes or if he's passive and we're not good enough to lay down turn and river.

Under the fundamental theorem of poker we should be maximising our opponents mistakes whilst decreasing our own.

By raising our opponent makes a mistake by folding an OESD and we don't because we're ahead of his c/r range. Once called we're marginally behind his range equity wise (how far depends on c/r frequencies) but we benefit from making fewer mistakes on turn and river because we've narrowed his range. He's not going to be bluffing against our super strong range. So we should be able to check turn and fold rivers. So basically we're wiping out the power of the semi-bluff by forcing him to play passively minimising our mistakes which is where his EV comes from with a semi-bluff.

Assuming the player is aggressive by calling the size of our mistakes are larger than his as he can represent many scare cards and we fold incorrectly; we also call incorrectly on bricks as he can have better 2 pair and sets. By 3betting we don't make mistakes because we're ahead of his c/r range. We then then also force him to play passively thus not making mistakes on turn and river.

If however we our opponent isn't aggro or is very readable calling is far better as he we won't be making mistakes post-flop and he will be making big mistakes. So keeping ranges as wide as possible is very beneficial.

Let me know what you think to my theory.