eschew is right on!

I find it quite funny the negative aura associated with the "30" ring on a triple. Are we that worried about what others think of us? I have a 50/40 on the front of my 28 pound bike... should I look down on all those whose bikes weigh less - "what'sa matta, can't make it on a heavy bike?" The only reason to buy a triple is for that low first gear. Second gear on a triple is the same as first on a compact double.

Looking at gear ratios on a 53/39/30 - 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-24-27 bike, I notice only numbers in the results, no adjectives, no attitude, no assumptions, and no prejudice.

3 gears overlap from the 53 to the 30, and 6 gears overlap from the 39 to the 30. I find it much easier to be able to do single shifts to get to my gear, rather than double shifts. Slightly bigger jumps, but no interum change that is toooooo hard or toooooo easy.

4.9, 4.5, 4.2, 3.9, 3.6, 3.4, 3.1, 2.8, 2.4, 2.2 on the 30 (in the order of 10th gear, 9th gear etc)
6.3, 5.8, 5.4, 5.1, 4.7, 4.5, 4.0, 3.6, 3.2, 2.8 on the 39 (in the order of 20th gear, 19th gear etc)
8.6, 7.9, 7.4, 6.9, 6.4, 6.1, 5.4, 4.9, 4.3, 3.8 on the 53 (in the order of 30th gear, 29th gear etc)

Do most of you start up a hill in 24th or higher? Do you start up in 17th or higher? If you answered no to those questions, there is no reason not to use the 30; you're using the same gears anyway! Find the gear where you finish your frequently traveled hills, and use that front as your beginning point. Less shifting is more! For anybody but hard core cyclists, I'm betting (my .02 cents) that means the 30 works best for you. The gears are more closely spaced on a 30 too.

Now if 42 is your middle ring, then go figure it out for yourself!