why do people think chicago is better than new york (living, state)
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.
If you want to drive, sure the larger AREA around NYC will have more/better beaches. But as far as beaches directly adjacent to the CITY, Chicago takes the cake easily.
No. New York City has more beaches within its city limits as well, not just the metro. Remember Chicago beaches are just in an interrupted straight line on only 1 side of the town, while NYC is made up of islands. The whole Chicago lakefront is 28 miles in total and not all of it is beaches. Staten Island alone has bigger shoreline. NYC also maintains two surf beaches (Far Rockaway, Breezy point), and there are obviously no real surf beaches in Chicago. And if you extend it to the near metro area - Long Island alone has 400 miles of beaches. Over 10 times more than the entire Chicago lakefront!
Actual beaches? - A beach is any coastal shoreline, an ocean vs. a great lake doesn't make a difference.
Comparing the ocean to a great lake by saying "it's a completely different thing" isn't the happy meal vs. five star dinner you're making it out to be. It's more of a big glass vs. little glass comparison - and at the end of the day you can drink out of both just fine.
After a body of water gets to a certain size, there really isn't much of a difference with regard to experiencing it on a beach or on a boat. Unless you're shark fishing or deep sea diving, what's the difference?
Furthermore:
Lake Michigan
All royalty free, or creative commons images.
I'd say those look like actual beaches. And I'd have to also disagree about NYC area beaches being superior. Have you ever been to a beach on Lake Michigan?
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
Yes, "Chicago beaches" are superior to the Hamptons! To the Nassau Beaches or those in Jersey! I'm sorry but Illinois does not have more beaches than the NYC area.
And yes, I have been to Chicago's lake and I've been all over the NYC area the beaches are far superior in and around NYC. I suppose Chicago has nicer beaches than Bora Bora since Borra Borra doesn't have high rises along their beach. Right?
Chicagoans have to be the most delusional bunch on this forum. None of those pictures are impressive and most don't even look like beaches.
No. New York City has more beaches within its city limits as well, not just the metro. Remember Chicago beaches are just in an interrupted straight line on only 1 side of the town, while NYC is made up of islands. The whole Chicago lakefront is 28 miles in total and not all of it is beaches. Staten Island alone has bigger shoreline. NYC also maintains two surf beaches (Far Rockaway, Breezy point), and there are obviously no real surf beaches in Chicago. And if you extend it to the near metro area - Long Island alone has 400 miles of beaches. Over 10 times more than the entire Chicago lakefront!
Because New York has more its automatically better! Be it rocky, gravel laden or overgrown beaches that serve as dumping grounds for bodies that go unnoticed for six months at a time. Give me a break. Chicago's beaches win hands down.
Also, for someone speaking of ignorance and being "factually wrong" - Chicago's beaches span both the North and South sides. Also, define "surf beach" - because last I knew, waves came in the same way no matter what type of beach the city has designated it to be.
If you're going to include the overly stretched out argument that includes all of Long Island and it's 2 1/2 hour drive to the other end then let immediate Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin boast their coasts and beaches as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by evmafioso
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
Yes, "Chicago beaches" are superior to the Hamptons! To the Nassau Beaches or those in Jersey! I'm sorry but Illinois does not have more beaches than the NYC area.
And yes, I have been to Chicago's lake and I've been all over the NYC area the beaches are far superior in and around NYC. I suppose Chicago has nicer beaches than Bora Bora since Borra Borra doesn't have high rises along their beach. Right?
Chicagoans have to be the most delusional bunch on this forum. None of those pictures are impressive and most don't even look like beaches.
When did the Hamptons become part of NYC? Furthermore, who besides you brought up the Hamptons?
I laugh at the idea that none of those pictures are impressive, and laugh ever harder that they "don't even look like beaches" since we've already been through the real beach/fake beach discussion. So tell me, what does a real, impressive beach from NYC look like?
Wouldn't doubt that NYC has more beaches in its limits, but Chicago has better beaches and shoreline in desirable areas of the city as opposed to New York.
I mean, its pretty incredible that in Oak Street Beach, you are steps away from Magnificent mile, Gold Coast, and then you can bike down the path and hit museum campus, Grant Park and Soldier field. Don't have anything remotely close to that in Brooklyn, or Staten Island. It would be like having prime beach area in Manhattan.
You know damn well no one goes to the "beaches" on Staten Island. LOL. I've never once heard anyone say they're going to the beach on Staten Island for the weekend.
Location: Pittsburgh (via Chicago, via Pittsburgh)
3,887 posts, read 5,519,793 times
Reputation: 3107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz
No. New York City has more beaches within its city limits as well, not just the metro. Remember Chicago beaches are just in an interrupted straight line on only 1 side of the town, while NYC is made up of islands. The whole Chicago lakefront is 28 miles in total and not all of it is beaches. Staten Island alone has bigger shoreline. NYC also maintains two surf beaches (Far Rockaway, Breezy point), and there are obviously no real surf beaches in Chicago. And if you extend it to the near metro area - Long Island alone has 400 miles of beaches. Over 10 times more than the entire Chicago lakefront!
yes, nyc has more, but i wouldn't say they are more desirable.
What does an nyc beach look like?Well heres one in the bronx
But Orchard Beach: AKA "Oil Beach" is not that goodness. There are NO waves, it's in a stale, stagnant bay off of the Bronx.
For people who know the deal, even Sandy Hook in NJ is a no go because it's too close to NYC. Brooklyn's gross. The Bronx, please. Staten Island? The one & only time I've ever heard anyone mention SI beaches was in this post.
Queens has the only beaches that count in NYC.
Long Island has good beaches, but we seem to be talking about NYC oceanfronts.
But Orchard Beach: AKA "Oil Beach" is not that goodness. There are NO waves, it's in a stale, stagnant bay off of the Bronx.
For people who know the deal, even Sandy Hook in NJ is a no go because it's too close to NYC. Brooklyn's gross. The Bronx, please. Staten Island? The one & only time I've ever heard anyone mention SI beaches was in this post.
Queens has the only beaches that count in NYC.
Long Island has good beaches, but we seem to be talking about NYC oceanfronts.
Ya but we're comparing nyc beaches to chicago beaches and i doubt they have any waves either. And whats stale or stagnant about pelham bay lol
Chicago and the metro area has a pretty decent shoreline though. I'd certainly call the "beaches" in Chicago beaches.
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.
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.
