Personally, I don't think this would work in practice as well as it sounds in theory. The thing is that, though there is a clear preference for smoking being banned for non-smokers, I honestly didn't know many people who adamantly refused to go to smoke-filled bars. I'm sure for some it was a deal-breaker, but I think most non-smokers just sucked it up and dealt with it. However, for a lot of smokers, smoking and drinking go hand-in-hand. Not allowing smoking is a deal-breaker, assuming the option to go to a smoking establishment exists. As such, the "let businesses decide" argument never really held a lot of water with me. I think overwhelmingly, given the choice, businesses would continue to allow smoking in some capacity since "Bar A allows smoking while Bar B doesn't" I think puts Bar B at a competitive disadvantage.
Obviously, your mileage may vary, but before the bans, I didn't know of a single establishment that was smoke-free. Aside from dining sections during hours where food was served, there was practically always ashtrays on tables that never had me questioning whether smoking was allowed or not.
And in all honesty, I never saw the big deal anyway. When the smoking ban hit Illinois in Aught Eight (the first I'd been exposed to), I thought it was going to be the end of a glorious era. I smoked at the time -- heavily at that when drinking. And I liked going to bars. But, the ban came and life went on. Even in the coldest parts of winter, I still managed to survive going outside to smoke. It was never a big deal.