thursdaysd

I have read a lot of threads lately telling people their itineraries are too fast-paced. I've even contributed to a few myself, but it occurred to me that I have traveled fairly fast myself, on occasion, quite happily. Take for instance, my ten-month 2004 RTW, planned before I discovered Fodors. The organizing principle was Scotland to Saigon by rail, which with embellishments took seven months and 17,000 miles. It was great, but I did keep moving.

I won't bore you with the whole thing (if you're interested the full itinerary is at http://wilhelmswords.com/rtw2004/ ). But, if I had posted this itinerary for the first couple of months, would I have been shot down for moving too fast? (Nights, not days, in parentheses, all transport by train unless otherwise stated.)

Fly via London to Glasgow (2)
Train and ferry to Portree, Skye (3)
Bus and train to Edinburgh (3)
Train to Durham, drive to B&B near Hadrian's Wall (2)
Durham (1)
(Revisit) London (1)
(Note: once I realized I needed to get out of Portugal before the World Cup soccer fans arrived I essentially cut London, but I spent a week there the year before instead, and I once lived there for two years.)

(Revisit) Paris (3) - day trip to Chartres
Bayonne (4) - day trips to St. Jean de Luz, St. Jean Pied du Port, Pau
Hondarribia (1) - my night in a parador
Santander (1)
Leon (2)
Santiago de Compostela (2)
(Revisit) Porto (4) - day trip to Braga
Regua (3) - Duoro valley, mountain railways
(Revisit) Coimbra (4)
Salir de Matos (4) - day trips to Obidos, Alcobaca, Batalha

Afternoon in Lisbon, night train to Madrid, bus to Toledo (2)
Madrid (1)
Train (1)
Ronda (4) - rest
Gibraltar (1)
(Revisit) Granada (1)
Train (1)
(Revisit) Barcelona (3)
Train (1)
Stresa (2)
Rome (3)
Ferrara (2) - day trip to Ravenna
Lunch in Venice on the way to Ljubljana to see if I needed to return (fell in love with Venice).

I should note that at the time of the trip I was in my late fifties. Also, I have since returned to London, Paris, Lisbon and Venice, not to mention other parts of England, France and Italy. I have traveled more slowly than this, and these days I try to avoid one-nighters, but I certainly had a great time. Having revisited this itinerary, I think I may be less ready to tell others they are traveling too fast!

janisj

thursdaysd: Sure - some fast trips are great. But I notice that several of your stops were 'revisits'. So you'd been before and were probably an 'old hand' at negotiating the cities and transport.

For a first-timer on a very short holiday, would you really recommend that sort of pace?

Michael

It depends on age, purpose and habits. I have no problems with one-nighters since we always live out of the suitcase even when staying a few days in one place. Packing takes 15 minutes (it's my job). Whether I take off touring by car for the day or leave after spending just one night at the hotel makes little difference.

thursdaysd

janisj - I had been in Portugal and Spain in 1970, so although I knew some of what I wanted see I was not at all up to date on transport or even the layout. While I might, and have, suggested slowing down, I don't think a trip would necessarily be ruined by traveling at this pace, mine certainly wasn't.

Michael

There is also a distinction to be made between large cities and medium sized ones. I would not visit Paris, London, Berlin, Vienna, Rome, Naples, Barcelona, Lisbon and others for just one day, but I have no problems with overnight stops in smaller provincial cities.

adrienne

<< would I have been shot down for moving too fast? >>

On first look it does seem that you're moving fast but you did build in enough time in towns for some rest from packing and moving on. Plus you have a mix of short and long journeys so you're not constantly traveling all day to get some place. And not every stop is a large city.

kja

I think the pace depends on the person, his/her interests, the places being visited and distances between them, and the number of people traveling together.

In many ways, I travel at a very fast pace -- I'm traveling solo, not looking for downtime, don't mind one-nighters (like Michael, I never unpack), and try to fit as much as I can into every precious travel day.

But I do try to give myself enough time in each place I visit to be have at least a reasonable expectation that I'll be able to see the things that I most want to see. (And I'm pretty greedy - I want it all!) So I wouldn't plan just a day or two in a major city, unless it's a revisit -- and not necessarily even then.

I could be wrong, but I think that's a far cry from some of the itineraries we see from people who don't seem to have looked at a map; haven't identified anything they want to do in the places they think they want to see; give no indication that they are even considering consulting a guidebook; and don't yet know how they personally experience checking in/out, getting accustomed to new places and new languages, etc.

IMHO, if travelers are aware of the potential downsides and that's how they want to travel, that's fine -- it's their choice, and I'm genuinely glad that we don't all travel the same way. But if someone asks for advice, I think its reasonable to point out when a pace is particularly - perhaps overly - fast and why. I guess I believe there's a difference between fast-paced and ill-considered. ;-)

ira

>Are fast-paced itineraries really so bad? <

Hi thur,
So, what was the highlight of your visit to Santander?

thursdaysd

Hi ira,

Santander was mostly a way to break the trek between Hondarribia and Leon, since there's no direct train and I even had to change train companies. I can't say I have any desire to return, but I did note "a truly excellent salad with tuna and anchovies". What I would like to see more of is the countryside in northern Spain, but I would likely need a car for that.

Ackislander

This is so much like the kind of travel that I had to do for work that I don't find it particularly satisfying for pleasure, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't.

And to be honest, all of us have done this kind of thing from time to time because there are cities that are only worth an afternoon, night, and the morning.

I would also distinguish it from the kind of trip where the purpose is to see the country or to make the trip itself, finding pleasure in what is over the next hill or the good place to eat in a place where one has never been. But these are for me the kind of trip where one doesn't do planning or have a schedule.

nytraveler

Your trip was fast-paced - but many of the places yo udid one night you had been before. And a lot of your stops were 3 nights - 2 full days - and not huge cities.

Many of the people that post give themselves 1 or 1,5 days to see London or Paris or Rome - and half of a day to see Venice or Paris. They are - in effect - trying to move more than twice as quickly as you did.

I understand what you did although I would do it a little slower. But some of these people are giving themselves 3 or 4 hours to see a sizable city with many sights - and in some cases they haven;t even looked at train schedules to see if what they want to do is possible. ( I love when they want to do an overnihgt train for a 3 or 4 hour trip - or pick one out that has 3 or 4 connections in the middle of the night.

If people really want to move very fast and know what they're doing - that's one thing, But I fear that most of the people are s inexperienced that they have no idea of what they are getting into.

thursdaysd

nytraveler - Oh, I quite agree that just a day for London needs correcting, but if it's a choice of five nights in London or three nights in London and two in York, should we automatically shoot that down? Or five nights in Barcelona vs. three nights plus one night on the train and one in Granada? (I have a hard time with a southern Spanish itinerary that skips the Alhambra.)

Pegontheroad

I agree that many of the people who plan fast-paced trips do so because they haven't researched or thought their journey through. Obviously that is not the case with you.

I prefer a more leisurely mode of travel, but perhaps that's partly because I don't want to be hefting my suitcase onto another train every day or two.

I like time to settle in and relax, also.

gertie3751

And I like to just 'travel', not necessarily to arrive. Sitting on a train watching the world go by, drinking unspeakable drinks and chatting to people in unspeakable languages is as good for me as doing the sights. I think a lot of this is attitude: are you dashing from place to place or is the whole experience important. I have to say I've never found time on my hands in a new city, could stretch it out forever!! On a forum like this you have to consider what the OP wants, and that's tricky because you don't know them and often they don't know themselves.

StCirq

Yes, they're bad if they really don't allow for time to see stuff. And because the people who plan them are clueless. I did lots of fast-paced itineraries when I was younger, but nothing like some of these people who come to Fodors are suggesting. And, as so many of us have learned, not booking lodging ahead of time means major headaches or even worse. And 10 places in 2 days just does not work! Even at my worst, I never tried that.

janisj

>>but if it's a choice of five nights in London or three nights in London and two in York, should we automatically shoot that down? Or five nights in Barcelona vs. three nights plus one night on the train and one in Granada?<<

I don't think folks 'shoot down' London and York in 5 days (some might suggest staying in London, but no one would call it crazy to do London/York in 5 days). But what we see too often is something like London/Paris/Amsterdam/Venice/the CT in 10 days w/ no conception of logistics/travel time.

When we try to explain the difficulties, one or two (you know who you are ) pop in to say '<i>Don't listen to these old fogies/know-it-alls/Fodorgarchs. They are just being mean</i>'

And the poor newbie's impossible itinerary is all of a sudden validated. That is just cruel.

thursdaysd

I don't see all of the traffic on the Europe board, it's too popular, but have we ever had a newbie come back and say they actually did one of these crazy itineraries?

cathies

Good point thursdaysd, no I don't think anyone has ever come back and said they were right and we are idiots. It would be good if somebody did, just once.

bilboburgler

I think the issues that we are really helping with are that new visitors to Europe
1) do not understand how big the place is or how densely packed are the possible areas of interest
2) do not understand that trains are a serious option
3) how moving and packing kills holiday plans
4) that Europe is different from home

Now each of those is pretty obvious but often times they do not believe us

ira

Hi thurs,

>thursdaysd on Mar 17, 13 at 7:34pm<

You looked at your notes, right?