Here's the situation I am in:
I have written a paper. I need to decide whether to submit it to GREAT [insert conference/journal name here] or to GOOD [ditto]. I would prefer to have a GREAT publication, rather than a GOOD publication. However, GREAT is a long shot, while GOOD is very likely to accept my paper.
Should I try submitting to GREAT or just submit to GOOD?
I'm thinking that I may as well try to get into GREAT. If it gets rejected, I can still submit to GOOD. So what's the harm?
Is there anything wrong with this thinking? That is, are there costs (other than time and effort) to being rejected from GREAT? In particular, does it look bad (in the eyes of reviewers/editors/PC members) to have a paper rejected?
For context, I am in computer science. I'm submitting to conferences and the accept/reject notification date for GREAT is before the submission deadline for GOOD. Thus there would be no delay in publication if it gets rejected by GREAT versus directly submitting to GOOD.
I think the probability that GREAT accepts my paper is around 15%. What is an appropriate threshold for trying to get in?