Originally Posted by ILUVUK
One of the reasons I'd consider a compact is I've read that doubles (even compacts) shift more crisply than triples. Granted, this is only from articles, so I have no idea whether or not it is true. And if it isn't, then there is no good reason for me not to keep a triple.
It isn't true.
I'm with you - if you already have a triple, there is no reason to change and no penalty for keeping it. Just don't shift into the small ring if you don't want to. If I were crit racing, I'd probably run a double - but I'm not, so I don't. If I lived in a flat area, I'd probably run a double - but I'm not, so I don't. But in both cases, a standard would probably be the way to go, no? I don't get the concept of a compact. It is a compromise - neither one nor the other. "Almost the same as" is not good enough for me.
Bottom line - a triple gets me places that a double (compact or otherwise) will not. That makes cycling more enjoyable for me, so I ride more. That's all the justification I need.