# Why is Read(Q) timestamp is not checked when a transaction issues a command reading Q?

Consider a concurrent schedule of two transactions $$T_1,T_2$$:

$$R_x(Q): T_x$$ Reads $$Q$$

$$W_x(Q): T_x$$ Writes $$Q$$

$$S:R_2(A),R_1(A),W_1(A),W_2(A)$$, this schedule is not conflict serializable.However, if we follow timestamping protocol, where $$TS(T_1) S is allowed because $$T_1$$ can read a variable after $$T_2$$ has read it, which is not conflict equivalent to schedule $$T_1 T_2$$ and is contradictory to the fact that timestamping protocol gives a conflict serializable schedule. What am I missing here?