U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Old 04-14-2014, 04:53 PM
1 posts, read 1,873 times
Reputation: 10


Overrated: Las Vegas, Los Angeles
Underrated:Tucson, Salt Lake City

For smaller cities;

Overrated: Reno, Laughlin NV
Underrated: Provo-Orem UT

Old 05-27-2014, 05:15 PM
68 posts, read 107,272 times
Reputation: 89
Overrated: San Francisco, Portland, Seattle
Underrated: Sacramento, Phoenix, Los Angeles
Old 06-06-2014, 01:49 PM
10,841 posts, read 14,315,266 times
Reputation: 7852
Overrated: San Francisco for sure. Even the nearby Yosemite doesn't live up to its reputation.
I didn't find any underrated cities. Maybe Chicago.
Old 06-06-2014, 01:50 PM
69 posts, read 147,464 times
Reputation: 75
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
Overrated: San Francisco for sure. Even the nearby Yosemite doesn't live up to its reputation.
I didn't find any underrated cities. Maybe Chicago.
Agree about Chicago. Maybe Toronto too.
Old 06-06-2014, 01:53 PM
10,841 posts, read 14,315,266 times
Reputation: 7852
Originally Posted by VT22 View Post
Agree about Chicago. Maybe Toronto too.
I live in Toronto and really can't say it is underrated. The only thing we can boast about is the low crime rate by American standard.
In Canada Vancouver is vastly overrated (it is a Portland OR pretending to be Canada's San Francisco) while Montreal is underrated.
Old 07-28-2014, 06:56 PM
Location: Who Cares, USA
2,343 posts, read 3,474,186 times
Reputation: 2258
Overrated: Las Vegas, easily.
Underrated: Tucson
Old 07-28-2014, 07:25 PM
Location: Philadelphia
5,302 posts, read 9,942,859 times
Reputation: 2136
Overrated: San Francisco and San Diego. Both are nice, and I prefer San Diego. But for me, after a while, San Diego gets boring. It's beautiful and has things to do, but it's really better to visit than live there. As for San Francisco, it is great for a vacation. But the people are extremely rude from my experience, and it is filthy. I'm also not a fan of its weather (and the beaches are freezing). I'll also say Las Vegas is overrated. It's a cool weekend getaway but I'd rather go somewhere exciting like New York City or Chicago where you can spend days and still not have seen everything.

Underrated: LA. I think it gets a lot of bad hype. Sure it isn't perfect, but nowhere is. The other thing is that a lot of people go to LA and think they've seen it, when in fact they've only seen Hollywood Blvd., gone to the beaches, hiked a bit, and gone to the amusement parks (for G-d's sake, Disneyland is in ORANGE COUNTY!!!). Some people like that, others feel like it was a letdown. It just seems many LA tourists don't really take advantage of all the nightlife the city has to offer, the restaurants, or the museums/arts. Maybe AT MOST, I'll hear someone went to see Beverly Hills and shopped there, or saw a Lakers game and concert. I mean, c'mon! What about a day trip to Catalina? And LA has more museums than any other American city-GO SEE 'EM!
Old 07-28-2014, 07:27 PM
Location: Philadelphia
5,302 posts, read 9,942,859 times
Reputation: 2136
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler View Post
For starters, climate is quite good with moderate winters and warm and sunny summers that cool to comfortable at night.

Location is exceptional with easy access to the Bay area, Lake Tahoe, Monterey, Yosemite, Napa. There's also exceptional biking with awesome riding.

Housing is reasonably priced and varied and jobs pay above average.
The summers ain't warm. Seattle, San Diego, Orange County...that's warm. Sacramento in summer is HOT!
Old 07-28-2014, 07:31 PM
Location: Philadelphia
5,302 posts, read 9,942,859 times
Reputation: 2136
Originally Posted by Dawn.Davenport View Post
Overrated: Los Angeles
Underrated: Los Angeles

Seriously. I feel that most people have one of two images of Los Angeles in their minds and neither one is accurate.

If you go to Los Angeles excepting it to be a paradise of perpetual sunshine, laid-back worldviews, where you'll be surrounded by blondes with perfects teeth who spend their days rollerblading down the beach wearing thongs and eating oranges, you'll be very much disappointed.

On the other hand, if you go to Los Angeles expecting it to be a suburban wasteland, full of vapid people, with no art or culture, you'll likely be pleasantly surprised. There's a lot of cool stuff happening in LA that people overlook.
One of the best posts I have EVER seen on City-Data!
Old 07-28-2014, 07:32 PM
529 posts, read 1,510,915 times
Reputation: 682
Originally Posted by Sizzle-Chest View Post
Since when is Denver a western city? It's a thousand miles from the Pacific Ocean. It's not even on the west side of the Rocky Mountains!
Originally Posted by Sizzle-Chest View Post
I feel like Denver is only west from an east coast perspective, but from a west coast perspective, it's quite far away. To me, and this is apparently just me, Colorado feels like a central state. Also, Denver is located at the end (or beginning) of the great plains and flat as a surfboard.
Denver is most definitely a western city, it's in Colorado which is a quintessential western state. Yes Colorado is more central than it is coastal but what difference does that make? The "west" is the region encompassing the mountain states and pacific states. If you consider the west to be only the coastal states then that's an odd and very narrow minded outlook. I don't know anyone who thinks that way. Lots of cities even in the coastal states are still miles and miles from the ocean (Spokane, Bakersfield, etc.). Also being "west of the Rockies" is being in an area like where Grand Junction is located in far western Colorado. So using this logic a place like Aspen or Vail is not in the west since neither are west of the Rockies. So are you saying Aspen is the Midwest? Having a backdrop to the east doesn't mean a place is west of a major geographic area like you seem to be saying.

By "west of the Rockies" I assume you mean a backdrop to the east which again is an odd basis to go by 100% when considering everything else that makes Denver western.

It seems like the only reason you consider Denver to not be a western city is because there is no backdrop like a mountain range to the east, well that's a very narrow minded view. You also say Denver being flat is a reason it's not western, yet cities like Sacramento, Phoenix, and Salt Lake City are also "Flat as a Surfboard". BTW Denver has many hilly areas in the metro area that are just as impressive as those in Seattle, they are just spread apart and not nearly as numerous.

Is it just because a city like Sacramento has tiny mountains visible 30 miles to the west in addition to the large ones to the east that you consider Sacramento not flat? Or just because Phoenix has small mountains visible in every direction as a reason it isn't flat? Both cities are still very flat! So if flatness is a factor why just single out Denver? Plenty of other western cities that are surrounded by visible mountains are still very flat, and even if Denver had another mountain range to the east it would still be flat! Denver at least has much bigger mountains near it than Phoenix or Sacramento do even if they are only on one side.

Sure a backdrop is nice to look at but plenty of western cities have very hilly terrain in the city proper but not much in terms of a backdrop. So why is this more western to you? For example a city like Portland has very hilly terrain in the city proper but the only comparable to Denver backdrop it has is Mount Hood. If Mount Hood weren't there I'd think Portland could be in Pennsylvania or something. San Diego also only has a few hilly areas in the city proper and very small mountains in the far distance that are much smaller than Denver's. See how many ways there are to look at cities and judge them as being western or not? So understand that Denver is very much western in terms of what basic criteria is needed.

A true Midwestern city like Kansas City, MO is very different than Denver. Kansas City is much greener and actually hillier in the city proper than Denver. You've obviously never been to the Midwest since you think that Denver is Midwestern simply because it is located on the edge of the great plains at the foot of the Rocky Mountains and has no backdrop of mountains to the east. Are the mountains to the west and the arid climate not enough to make it western?

Denver is arid, sunny, and next to huge mountains. All of this equals WEST!!

Last edited by JMM64; 07-28-2014 at 07:59 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top