There's no methods of field sobriety testing that are actually reliable, what it's best at doing is allowing police to get probable cause even if a sober driver just happens to not be good at something they've not done before and are being asked to do in the dark and cold outside their car in a high stress moment; or, worse, if the police officer judging them is just biased and wanting to subjectively decide they failed.
I'm pretty sure lawyers' advice is generally to say no when asked to take a field sobriety test, as you're basically only asked to do it if the police already think you're going to fail and therefore will be at minimum subconsciously biases towards expecting that. Much better to only let them do any breath/blood tests they can legally insist on. (At least, if you are indeed sober. I don't know what the best advice is if you're going to fail those tests, maybe in that case a tiny chance of being convincing with a field sobriety test is worth the chance?)
I'm pretty sure lawyers' advice is generally to say no when asked to take a field sobriety test, as you're basically only asked to do it if the police already think you're going to fail and therefore will be at minimum subconsciously biases towards expecting that. Much better to only let them do any breath/blood tests they can legally insist on. (At least, if you are indeed sober. I don't know what the best advice is if you're going to fail those tests, maybe in that case a tiny chance of being convincing with a field sobriety test is worth the chance?)