arifgokcen wrote: Fri Dec 05, 2025 11:46 pm Long-time lurker, first-time poster. I just had to congratulate you on such an unbelievable system. Thank you, you can indeed make a very decent living with this

Nice to meet you and thanks for making a post. Hope we'll see you around

arifgokcen wrote: Fri Dec 05, 2025 11:46 pm Long-time lurker, first-time poster. I just had to congratulate you on such an unbelievable system. Thank you, you can indeed make a very decent living with this

Welcome and thanks for the nice words. Wish you success and a good staying.

Cagliostro wrote: Sat Dec 06, 2025 12:55 am Welcome and thanks for the nice words. Wish you success and a good staying.

Cagliostro how can i reach you. Tried email but didnt hear back. Since i am a new member i still cant send PM.

NASDAQ Structural Veto Conflict: Why is MTF BIAS RED when M5/M15 are BULLISH?
Hello everyone, I have a critical question regarding the Azimuth filter, and I'm hoping Mr. Cagliostro or anyone familiar with the internal workings can confirm my understanding of this structural veto.

I've attached three charts (M1, M5, and M15) of the NASDAQ ($US100) that show a confusing conflict right after a major low:

The Conflict: Visually, the M5 and M15 charts clearly show a strong, aggressive BULLISH reversal and price action. However, at the exact same moment, the MTF BIAS Dashboard on the M1 chart shows a unanimous BEARISH reading across all three timeframes (M1/M5/M15 are all RED/Bearish Expanding).

Why is the MTF BIAS Red if the M5 and M15 price action is clearly Bullish?

My analysis is that this is not a bug, but the system's Structural Veto at work, and it's the ultimate filter:

Even though the price action is aggressively bullish in M5/M15, the Azimuth filter refuses to flip the MTF BIAS to GREEN because the price has not yet met the strict criteria to break the dominant Bearish Primary Trend (L4) on the Higher Time Frame (HTF).

This means the system is classifying the entire strong move as a deep structural Pullback until one of two conditions is met on the HTF:

L4 Swing High is Broken: The price must successfully break and close above the key L4 Swing High on the M5 or M15 chart.

Confirmed Closure: The price must have confirmed a L4 candle closure above the Azimuth MA/AVWAP on the HTF.

If this interpretation is correct, the MTF BIAS is acting as a Súper-Filtro L4 that respects the dominant Bearish trend and vetoes a LONG entry until that highest structural level aligns.

Mr. Cagliostro, or anyone else: Is the unanimous Bearish MTF BIAS a definitive VETO from the L4/HTF structure, invalidating a LONG entry, even with this strong visual bullish action?

Thank you for any insight you can provide on this critical filtering mechanism.

Why is the MTF BIAS Red if the M5 and M15 price action is clearly Bullish?


You must study the first page. The system starts considering a possible reverse leg each time there is a new swing that breaks the current structure.
Trades are validated only when you have all the elements converging...

-BIAS (or MTF bias)
-Candle color
-Oracles

Best.

"Hello Mr. Cagliostro,

Thank you once again for confirming the importance of the L4 structural veto. Your explanation confirms why the system is so successful at high-probability trading.

However, many traders (myself included) rely on scalping for funding challenges and preferred trading style, which requires a higher entry frequency. The strict L4/HTF convergence often filters out these valid, short-term trades (L1/L2 swings).

My question is: Did you design a specific 'Scalping Mode' or a less restrictive rule set within the Trinity System?

For instance, can we execute a scalp trade (M1 chart) if we have full Oracle convergence (3/3) and Black Zone confirmation (M1), even if the Azimuth MTF BIAS (L4/HTF) has not yet flipped, provided we use very tight targets (e.g., L2/L3 Swing Highs)?

Any guidance on adapting the Trinity framework for high-frequency scalping would be greatly appreciated."

JCCTREND wrote: Sat Dec 06, 2025 4:19 am "Hello Mr. Cagliostro,

Thank you once again for confirming the importance of the L4 structural veto. Your explanation confirms why the system is so successful at high-probability trading.

However, many traders (myself included) rely on scalping for funding challenges and preferred trading style, which requires a higher entry frequency. The strict L4/HTF convergence often filters out these valid, short-term trades (L1/L2 swings).

My question is: Did you design a specific 'Scalping Mode' or a less restrictive rule set within the Trinity System?

For instance, can we execute a scalp trade (M1 chart) if we have full Oracle convergence (3/3) and Black Zone confirmation (M1), even if the Azimuth MTF BIAS (L4/HTF) has not yet flipped, provided we use very tight targets (e.g., L2/L3 Swing Highs)?

Any guidance on adapting the Trinity framework for high-frequency scalping would be greatly appreciated."

Interesting question.

Yes, you can scalp low TF basically using liquidity levels and oracles, but you need to consider carefully the usual session start traps, news, etc....
By no means I suggest to trade against a formed L3/L4 swing, that would be risky in any TF.