Assuming a 3x open and 100bb effective.

I guess a good 3 bet shove range (for value) is the following:

AJs+ AQo+ TT+

Also 3 bet calling:

KJs+, ATs, QJs, 87s-T9s

No?

I saw an upswing poker article on an unrelated post flop situation but their recommended bb vs. Sb range pre was pictured. They recommend a very wide calling range (and 3 bet value range similar to above) where we play literally every suited combo and every offsuit combo where the lowest card is a 7 and some extra Kxo, Qxo, and low unsuited 1 gappers, playing a comfortable majority of hands.

However some hands designated for 3 bets (Clearly 3 bet bluffs) were not "the bottom of the range" or "top of the folding range" as wisdom I often see suggests. For example, they suggest flatting 72s but 3 betting 75s.

Thoughts on this? How would you construct a 3bet fold range in the bb with the above or similar value and 5 bet shove range? What are our 5 bet bluffs also?

Think about the way (realizable equity) and (non showdown winnings) affect the payouts for every hand you could choose to 3 bet.

In action, the result is a range breakdown that looks like this, with the hands increasing in ev from top to bottom:

(hands that fold to a min 4 bet) these hands don't miss value, which may have been gained by calling, by having to fold(75s for example, which has more realizable equity than 74s, 73s, 72s).

(hands that call a min 4 bet) these hands remain profitable in the face of a min 4 bet, so we might as well choose hands with the most realizable equity(KQs may not beat a single hand in your opponent's 4 bet range, but it performs better than Kings with a worse kicker. I would prefer to have KQs to call the 4 bet than K2s, for example, which is why I would 3 bet KQs long before I 3 bet K2s, which I might vs a small blind with high fold to 3 bet %.)

(hands that can call a bigger 4 bet) this is quite variable based on raise size. I have this loose idea that this variation has a profound effect on 3 bet range construction as we need hands that can continue vs any raise size without folding more than mdf would suggest, while still maximizing our ev of (3 bet range) and (call range). Note that bluffs don't apply here preflop.

Depending on the 4 bet size, 5 betting is usually all in for me unless ridiculously deep. When I face a 4 bet I estimate the final price that my opponent will get on calling my 5 bet and which hands will be profitable(if 4 bet is very poorly sized, I may have zero bluffs in my range due to offering my opponent such good odds on calling the 5 bet). The worse price I'm offering my opponent, the more I'll sneak in hands that perform well vs the 5 bet calling range(A5s>A6s for example)

I'm not massively keen on the Upswing BvB ranges. I'm used to using Snowie's instead, which have a more linear 3-betting range. There is some polarity however. As a standard, I put A3o and A2o into my 3b/folding range. I've also got a couple of random suited hands in there that don't do particularly well as calls (K3s and J5s).
Hands like 75s (and T9s/98s) play perfectly well as calls, so I think it's a bit of a 'waste' to 3b/fold them, or 3b/call and play with a lower SPR that doesn't suit them so much.
That said, if your player pool opens too many SBs, and doesn't defend well vs 3-bets (i.e. they fold too often), then it's probable that 3-betting with suited connectors/gappers is a little bit more profitable than flatting. Just be aware that if you 3-bet at a high frequency (with something like 88+, 87s+, AT+, plus A3o/A2o and a couple more random hands) then your flatting range is going to be pretty weak, and you won't flop many combo draws if you never flat 87s+.

The linear range misses quite often, but connects to more “thin value” and when you are defending the BB, thin value is often enough to do the job. You still have plenty of whiffed flops to take a stab at with your non-value.