Where should I go in Europe to see as much as possible in 9 days? (Selected Destinations)

With 9 days, the goal of moving around is diametrically opposed to the goals of saving money and seeing as much as possible.

Travel from city to city will both add to expenses and preclude sightseeing.

Instead, pick 1 or 2 sight-rich cities (if 2, with good rail connections). For instance: London-Paris; Amsterdam-Paris; Paris with day trips.

Keep it simple, plan well, and you will see a lot.

Thanks for the reply!

Ignoring costs for the moment, what are your thoughts on the logistics of London > Paris > Amsterdam > Copenhagen via train? (fly into London and out of Copenhagen) (night train from Amsterdam to Copenhagen)

That would be one full day in each city plus one extra full day.

Or if that is too much, I could just cut out Amsterdam.

Oh I mean cut out Copenhagen

That sounds better, thename1000. I was going to ask why skip Amsterdam instead of Copenhagen? You have it right.

I have seen recommendations that one spend a minimum of two days in one city. You need to figure in your travel time between cities, too.

Personally, there is more than enough places to see to fill 4 days in both London & Paris, leisurely being the operative word. :-)

London > Paris > Amsterdam is feasible and, if you don't expect to see a lot, a nice set of choices. The train trips, and related checkings out and in and orientations, will take up most, but not all, of two of your days. A'dam one of the easiest airports for your flight home.

Planning ahead will help you to maximize the time you have.

I can't see myself spending less than 3 nights in any of those cities, with London and Paris deserving at least 4 or 5 nights each.
In 9 days (probably 8 nights) I would therefore choose only 2 cities.
Paris, London and Amsterdam are reasonably close to one another and are very well connected by fast trains. I would choose two of those three if you only have 8 nights on the ground.
Doing all 3 would be ideal, but you would need at least 10-12 nights on the ground, which you don't seem to have.
The choice is yours. All 3 are wonderful, although I think Paris and London would be my choice.

The kind of 'seeing' you do in a trip like this with one day in a major city is of about the same quality as renting a video -- in fact, you'd be better off getting the whole Rick Steves library and watching them -- would save money to.

This trip is all about getting there with almost no being there. With only 9 nights on the ground/8 full days, you should identify two places and really explore what they have to offer. You will see a lot more that way and experience a lot more. Riding trains and checking in and out of hotels and traveling to and from trains and airports is the least fun part of any trip -- why design a trip that is all about that? YOu could fly into London and out of Paris with the train between them. Each of these cities needs more than 4 days -- but each will pay off 4 days. Flying into Paris, using Vueling or Easyjet between and then out of Barcelona would be another cool trip. There are tons of day trips around Paris and several interesting ones near Barcelona -- we did Figueroa and Montsarrat when we were there. The day trips near Paris take an hour or so of travel and you have literally dozens of options e.g. Reims, Chartres, Versailles, Rouen, Senlis, Auvers sur Oise -- even a train to Tours and a mini van tour of chateaux in the Loire.

..

I agree with Roberto. Take London, Paris & Amsterdam and choose 2 of the 3 cities. Nine days seems like a long time, but it really isn't. It's better to spend a few days to see a city, than to constantly be in transit from one city to the next. Not only does that waste time, but it also costs more money. I would start in London and spend 4 nights there. Take the Eurostar to Paris and spend 5 nights there. Fly home from there.

Travel from anywhere to anywhere always seems to take longer than anticipated. With that thought in mind, and not wanting to lose anymore "in between time" than necessary, my advice would be to concentrate on only two cities. Three at the very most!! With your limited time, perhaps London and Paris would be your best bet. But the particular cities is your call depending on your own interest. I've always thought quality time in a few places is better than a brief glance at a lot of cities. TC