I 100%, n 100%, T 100%, J random %
I don't consider MBTI to be a very useful method of categorization since it isn't entirely based on valid fundamental principles and thus is little more than a stereotype.
On the basic level it is. On a deeper level it isn't.
The original theory by Jung was about the catagorization of different ways of thinking. Really, MBTI is a theory about how people think, and nothing else. It often is associated with different types of behaviors, but they are not consistent enough to draw definitive patters of behavior. The weak corralation though has resulted in the bastardized version of MBTI that we encounter on a more or less day to day basis. Thus, the main ideas that were developed by elizabeth myers and isabelle briggs are in many respects, false.
I find the tool useful because if I know the general style in which a person thinks, then I can adjust my presentation in such a way that they more easily understand me, and what I am speaking of. Outside of that there is not too much use except for being able to "spot" people, which is hard to explain.
There have been links to body language and these types (the original types based off Jung all those years ago), that appears to be the most consistent form of typing. Thus I largely use body language as the main tool to type someone.
I studied this or a while bit more or less have given up a large portion of it because it has sort of worn out it's use to me. I have not forgotten it, don't get me wrong. It just plays a less active roll in my mind.