Baku never actually aligned or intended for memory loss trap or 3 near death coverup, only benefitted from it. 

Why do I say this? because his plan being 3 near death or memory loss trap (or leap second) could only have happened because circumstance allowed for it, and actively helped Baku. 

For that I want to explain the idea I had regarding scaling tactics where tactics can only intend to achieve as many goals as it has vectors the character can control. For example Baku choosing the date of STL, its a single linear vector in which Baku can choose the day, so the day of leap second and memory loss aligning is entirely by coincidence and not because Baku aligned the two factors. It was impossible for Baku to just have leap second or just have memory loss trap, the two came together in a package and that dual purpose tactic isn't because Baku was smart but because the circumstances were fortunate for him.

This is also true for 3ND, the best time to reset your cylinder for the second time given that Baku has already went through near death the first time, the best time to reset his cylinder the second time would be around 30-40 seconds. Now what about for Baku’s timing alignment strategy in STL (how to hop on leap second route strategy)? Baku needed to change the timing route 1 more time, as Souichi’s near death in round 2 allowed for a death trade, but his near death has to be below 1 minute accumulation near death as if he exceeds to gets too close to a 1 minute accumulation his 5 minute near death could have taken 6 minutes, which will make it unable to change the timing route variation. (the timing route variation and death trade is explained in 2sd doc)

Baku however still wanted to stall as much rounds as possible before he hops on leap second route as after his near death to hop on leap second route his actions will be much more predictable as he would be cornered more, so he needed to be close to 9:00 as possible before he died for the second time. This means Baku for his leap second strategy didn’t want to die at such a low accumulation that he wasted more possible rounds he could have consumed before his cylinder reset. This means for his LS strategy Baku needed his second near death to happen at around 40 seconds, conveniently aligned with the amount of accumulation needed for 3ND. 

So as nonsensical as 3ND was for a cover strategy, Baku didn't even have to intend for it and it would automatically be handed to him. Baku by trying to accumulate within 30-40 second mark and trying to reset after that, so he can hop on leap second route would to bystanders automatically look like he is using 3ND. Baku only had 1 vector of “what accumulation to do second reset with” and he achieved 2 purposes. So even if a completely random person who only intended to do leap second trap, and never considered 3ND could just by trying to chase leap second could seem like he is doing 3ND, so this cover strategy was just handed to him. I mean if Baku seriously intended to use 3ND as a cover strategy that would also make no sense since 3ND itself is bs, so it could be said that Souichi was on crack when he said Baku is using 3ND strategy and Baku could have been like “wtf is this guy saying, well everyone seems convinced so ig”, but then again he later believed Souichi’s bluff so who knows. 

As I mentioned in this explanation a tactic can only have as much intention of the strategist reflected in them as the amount of vectors it has. Memory loss trap (or leap second, I don't know which one convinced Baku to use the date and which one Baku just realized later could be useful) and 3ND cover up was aligned by circumstance / luck and not by intention. This is because with just 1 vector in a tactic (date for the memory loss trap and accumulation before second reset for 3ND cover) it's impossible to achieve 1 of the things without doing the other, so it was basically a given no matter who did it.

I do want to address some implications I made with this “multi-purpose tactic scales with vector number” argument. For one, it does not mean a tactic can only achieve 1 purpose intentionally as it's a single move. A single move can reflect multiple intentions. Suppose you have a massive wardrobe of nearly all types of clothes, then if you choose a certain type of pants it can reflect at minimum 3 vectors (color, texture, length, way more I can't be bothered with), so similar to this if a tactic had multiple vectors it could reflect an intentional action by the strategist to align certain factors and achieve multiple goals with a single tactic.  

The strategist can have a tactic with only 1 vector, but can still structure the rest of the strategy to benefit from the ripple effects that were not intentional, so a tactic achieving multiple purposes in a strategy is still impressive but the alignment itself would be attributed to the strategist. 

If the strategist intentionally positioned themselves so they can play a tactic where circumstance naturally aligns then that would make the tactic achieve multiple purposes intentionally but at that point its not really a tactic as there were other tactics to facilitate a single tactic, so its a strategy. 

Baku didn’t really position himself specifically so memory loss and leap second aligns, nor did he change the variables of the DTH game so 3ND and timing variation alterations naturally align, so those neat methods Baku used is still a product of circumstance / luck and  not intention.