Background: Recent debiasing studies have shown that a short explanation about the correct solution to a reasoning problem can often improve performance of initially biased reasoners. Yet, with only one single training session, there is still a non-neglectable group of reasoners who remained biased. Aims: We explored whether repeated training on a battery of three reasoning tasks (i.e., bat-and-ball, base-rate neglect, and conjunction fallacy) can further boost reasoning performance. Sample: We recruited 120 adults, native English speakers, through Prolific Academic. Methods: We ran two studies with a battery of three classic reasoning tasks (see above). We used a two-response paradigm in which participants first gave an initial intuitive response, under time pressure and cognitive load, and then gave a final response after deliberation. In Study 1, we ran two repeated training sessions within one week. In Study 2, we ran a third training session two months after the initial study. Results: Study 1 showed that after the first training session, most of the participants solved the problems correctly, as early as the initial intuitive stage. This training effect was further boosted by additional training, which helped almost the full sample to benefit. Study 2 indicated that these effects were robust and persisted after two months. Conclusions: The repetition of the training can further boost performance compared to the effect of one single training. These results are consistent with the wider literature on repeated testing and can serve as a proof-of-principle for a repeated debias training approach.