Another important aspect of Condorcet's Method voting, which I haven't seen anyone mention yet:
If you think a state is really the best choice, but are afraid that most other voters don't think so, ranking it first will in no way lessen the impact of your relative ranking of the front-runners.
A not-quite randomly selected example:
You think Alaska is the best choice, but have heard that many others don't like it, and that the front runners are New Hampshire, Wyoming, and Idaho.
If you rank Alaska first, and a majority of other voters rank it near the bottom, your relative rankings of NH, WY, and ID will be just as meaningful in determining the outcome as if you ranked AK lower.
The bottom line is: rank the states as you see them, and let the chips fall where they may.
Edit: Don't be surprised if Montana, Delaware, Vermont, or South Dakota do better than some or all of the supposed front runners. This forum represents only a small portion of the FSP. (Maine and North Dakota are the only states I haven't seen significant support for, yet both have some distinct advantages.)