if you had to choose between Naples and Florence . Which should you choose ?

Geographically, Florence makes a lot more sense so you're going in one direction and not zigzagging all over the place (I really liked Naples but it's out of the way and will just increase your travel time to Venice).

Logistically, if you're flying there's not much difference where you go. By train, however, it's 5+ hours Naples/Venice, and only 2 hours Florence /Venice. Big difference, and for a shorter trip I would think the less time you spend on the road, the better.

As far as the cities themselves, it's really apples & oranges. Florence is somewhat more genteel, Naples more in your face, less walkable than Florence. Food awesome in both places. Might be a tad warmer in Naples.

If you've never been to Italy, definitely Florence over Naples. Florence is much easier to appreciate and much less overwhelming than Naples.

It's similar to the discussion of operas on this thread: https://community.ricksteves.com/travel-forum/austria/which-opera-for-a-newbie

Some operas are much better for first timers than others; so are some cities. Just as some operas are better appreciated after one has heard the "easier" ones, some cities are better appreciated when one has been to the "easier" ones.

Absolutely Florence. Plus it makes more sense in your logistics.

Actually on my first trip to Italy, I (gladly) chose Naples but that's because I wanted to concentrate on Rome and south of Rome. So I purposely left out cities to the north since I didn't want to waste more time in between cities. Minimizing transit time is pretty much my rule of thumb - I try to pick regions to see where cities/sites are relatively close together, knowing I'll be back.

This has been written about many times but many people agree that Naples requires some time to sink in and appreciate. People who whizz through there in day or half day and see only the port area often come back with negative comments. It's truly a place to take your time exploring because its fast pace may be a bit off-putting at first. I don't think it's "worlds away" from Rome though - it has some fantastic sites as well as less tourists, more locals, more traffic choked streets, and more graffitti. I personally think 3 days is just too short for that area to make it worthwhile and, at the same time, add more travel time to get to Venice.

Florence. Naples is just too far out of the way, imo. Much better to spend your time going in one direction rather than backtracking.

Based on the time you have, I would say Firenze fits better with the rest of your itinerary.

thanks everyone. I have decided Florence to naples.