I don't really see any disadvantage doing the full test. But it's sort of like training for a 10km race by timing yourself doing 15km. It'll help your endurance I'm sure, but who knows how fast you could've ran the 10km alone. Especially if you had 3 sections instead of 2 before, say, RC. It might just impact what your score could've been.

That said, it'll only help you if you're writing when they revert back to normal.

When people refer to the trend of high scores, or the inflation of people at 160+, what data are they pulling from? I'd love to take a look at it as I can't seem to find it myself.

Nevermind the comment above me answered this question, woops.

If you're willing to wait until next admission cycle to apply, I'd personally cancel. If you're going to be applying this cycle regardless of how January goes, probably best to keep it.

Even if you can get an extra point, I've heard January is well worth the retake!

I think it also depends on how you're scoring. Naturally someone who's scoring 150 should spend significantly more time reviewing than someone who's achieving 170.

I'm usually doing one every 2-4 days as I like to feel as though I've made some ground on whatever I felt was weak on my previous one before I 'use' another PT. I also find this helps almost look forward to writing the next PT, as you have something new you're wanting to apply.

I'd also be more inclined to take a PT more often if my BR was significant higher than my timed score, as I'd think I could benefit the most from gaining speed at that point.