I think there's some amount of misconception about today's sizing. The really small sizing is just a preference that many racer types have, not a method. But if you use the method such as on Colorado Cyclist (the standard method almost everyone else uses), you're not ending up with an excessively small frame at all, but rather just the traditional amount of drop for a road racing bike. Mine is sized that way (it's a custom-made road bike), and I only get minimal clearance with the level top tube (less than an inch without shoes). That would normally put your handlebars probably a couple of inches below the saddle with a standard racing stem setup. I have an extended head tube, so my bars end up about an inch below (unless I use on higher stem, which is what I do most of the time). I don't have a huge amount of seatpost showing either. It's very reasonable. From my personal experience with my own bike (and others before it), the standard "inside leg measurement" times .67 (or .65 for ctr-to-ctr) gives just the right amount of standover. Even the next size up would probably have me resting on the top tube. I consider that to be classic diamond racing frame sizing applicable to bikes from the 80 thru to today.