But Gonzalez pointed out that Orlando "wins out when it comes to costs." The worst cities for singles — which include Greensboro, North Carolina, at number one; followed by Fontana, California; and Laredo, Texas — share one very unromantic quality: They're all pretty suburban. "In these more suburban communities, there are not a lot of singles.In partnership with AXE Deodorant Bodyspray Hooking that hottie is hard enough without the odds stacked against you, so the city researchers at Sperling’s Best Places have identified for you "America’s Best and Worst Cities for Dating." The study is based on criteria that includes percentage of singles ages 18-24, population density, and dating venues per capita such as concerts, coffee shops, bars, bowling alleys, etc., and includes 80 metro areas in America. Related: Golden Oldies: One in 10 Americans Dating Online is a Baby Boomer What also helped San Fran move to the top of the list is "the sheer number of singles that are there," said Gonzalez."There's also a pretty good gender balance, about 3/10th of a percentage point off from being 50/50 [men and women], veering slightly more male." That Orlando beat out Miami for second place is intriguing, given that Orlando doesn't have the same degree of happening nightlife as Miami.You’d think that big cities like New York and Miami would be full of singles looking to mingle, right? According to a new survey by Badoo, the best and worst cities for dating aren’t what you’d expect. The survey claims that the best city for singles in the United States is Norfolk, Virginia, because it has the highest concentration of singles in the nation.(But then again, you have to be OK with living in Norfolk.) It's followed by Chandler, Arizona; Colorado Springs, Colorado; Glendale, Arizona; and Akron, Ohio.
'” (Which seems off to me, because when I was single I think the subway enhanced my dating life.) In sprawling LA, on the other hand, “Not everyone is inclined to navigate three freeways for the chance to get laid, stone sober. But there in the middle of 500 miles of sprawl, it was all of a sudden strange to be sitting too close on a couch with the clock ticking down.
The survey found that the worst to be single are Vermont, Washington, New Jersey and Massachusetts, so if you live in one of those states now and aren’t having much luck finding a significant other, you now know why.“It’s striking to see that massively dense cities across the United States have a lower percentage of singles,” said Joey Hadfield, spokesperson for Badoo.
“Contrary to popular belief, these metropolitan areas aren’t necessarily an optimal place for dating success.
And Los Angeles lacks an urban center where young, single people congregate — they live everywhere.” Dating in Washington, D. with her boyfriend; then they promptly broke up, and he moved back east.
C, where the high proportion of singles is more intimate and leads to more organic relationships, was summed up by one resident as, “I slept with someone I never wanted to see again, and now he works 20 feet away from me and is also friends with all of my friends. C.” Plus: 16 Excellent Retorts To The Question, “Why Are You Still Single? Finding herself at a party, paired off with a friend of a friend who took interest in her, she asked: “Is that what love is now?