I've spent a lot of time over the last four years championing Sofia on this blog. It's a place that I've grown to like. It's a place that I've explored and continue to explore. In my first year, I hit up all of the Lonely Planet to-dos first and then I branched out from there.

Over the years, I've heard a lot of people--Bulgarians and non--Bulgarians alike--say: Oh, one day is more than enough in Sofia. Do a day in Sofia and then move on.

This sentiment has always made me shake my head. There's a lot to do in this city. Sure it might not be as in your face as some place like Paris or London but I've always thought that's what makes it special. Sofia isn't crawling with tourists.  It's a city that you have to be willing to give a chance.

The New York Times travel section seems to have done just this.

Enter <a href="http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/09/02/travel/36-hours-in-sofia-bulgaria.html?_r=0" target="_blank">this New York Times piece on Sofia</a>. It's part of their 36-hours series. You know, what to do in a city if you only have 36 hours. The series usually gives one a good glimpse of the spirit of the city in what's basically a weekend. It's usually a fun down and dirty whirlwind tour of the city.

I read the story and thought: Ah-ha. We've arrived. Sofia in 36 hours in the NYT.

Then I thought: Phew. I've been to all of these places. I would <em>hate</em> it if the NYT was a step ahead of me.

This was followed by this: I've written about all these spots but two on my blog. Then again I've been in Sofia for 4 years. That's a lot of hours in Sofia. Something like 35063.24 hours in Sofia--give or take a few vacations. Take that NYT.

My one complaint was that many of the places in this piece seem to be straight out of a guide book. Take Hambara  for example. Sure it's cool enough but it's in <em>every</em> guidebook I've ever read. They unashamedly serve cheep wine out of a box and they never seem to be able to make change for a 20 or they sigh heavily about it. There are plenty of places with better wine and service.

<a href="http://eenk.com/" target="_blank">Bulgarian blogger elenko</a>'s one complaint has to with the phrase "Zagorka-swigging hipsters." I sort of liked the ring of it. He didn't. He wrote to the NYT about it. You can <a href="http://twitpic.com/aphmsw" target="_blank">read his email here</a>. He makes a good point. Luckily, I like the phrase "Pirinsko-swigging" as well.

But when I really think about it, I think that "Pirinsko-swilling" would be even better as swigging doesn't really capture the way Bulgarians drink beer.

Swigging suggests to me that the drinker is in a hurry and drinking the beer quickly and taking large mouthfuls of beer with each drink. Swilling on the other hand suggests drinking steadily to excess. Of course, the result of the two is the same it's just manner that the beer is relayed to the mouth is different.

As such, I'd go with the verb "to swill" as a better choice than "to swig" because it seems to capture the real finesse with which Bulgarians drink beer (or really anything for that matter).