Using "Game Theory" in a common limit hand

[Aves]

Disclaimer:
- I use the term "game theory" to mean "optimum play", not sure if this is right or not

A common limit hand I encounter seems to go as follows: I raise in early position, only BB calls. He checkraises me on a T62 rainbow flop.

What I want to know is, what percentage of the times I don't have a pair should I be trying to bluff him off his presumable pair.

My Assumptions:
- My raising range is JJ+ and AJ+, meaning 24 combos of overpairs and 48 combos of A-high hands (range chosen for simplicity)
- BB checkraised with 1 pair, tens or lower
- The times BB improves his hand cancel with the times I improve my A-high hands; i.e. we can assume that neither BB nor I will improve our hands by the river

If I just call the flop checkraise and raise his turn bet, BB will be getting roughly 8:2 to call my turn raise and river bet. Therefore, I should be showing up with an overpair about 80% of the time to be "unreadable" when taking this line, correct?

If I 3-bet his flop checkraise, he'll be getting roughly 7:2 to check-call my turn and river bets. Therefore, to be "unreadable" when taking this line, I should show up with an overpair about 77.8% of the time, right?

It seems either line produces about the same percentage, so I'll just use 80% for simplicity. Since there are 24 combos of overpairs, I should only bluff with 6 of the 48 A-high hands, i.e. a frequency of 12.5%.

Does my logic for this example seem reasonable? Does anyone have any suggestions for adjusting the frequency i came up with, improving the example, or adding any variables/complications? Thanks for any replies.