The ‘why’ can set the backdrop. The ‘how’ determines the route — and the route is tradable.
Intraday structure and geometry is about coordination and permission. When you see it enough times, you realize a single tick isn’t ‘small’—it’s a gate.
We are monetizing the ‘gate’ under constraint, not arguing about the ultimate destination.
The gate more often than not sets the destination as well.
This is why you can see me being right about the sequence that converts belief into trades.
Readers realize they’ve been “right” while still losing because they never had the route.
It is because patterns aren’t predictors — they’re social devices for the route.
Cup-and-handle, flags, etc. are usually treated like mystic signals.
I am reframing them as coordination templates: they work when they help thousands of independent actors line up risk at the same time.
It is because liquidity is the real “physics”
Instead of “more buyers than sellers,” the focus becomes:
where orders are forced to transact,
where stops/limits cluster,
where liquidity thins,
where the tape goes one-way.
A different ontology: markets as plumbing + timing, not opinion polls.
They thought markets were about reasons.
You’re showing markets the ‘how’ — and that’s why the route can be monetized.