Originally Posted by
bibbju
I'm really surprised at the number of people preferring Bruges to London. Convenience isn't everything! If you haven't been to either place, London will blow your mind and you won't want to leave! Whereas Bruges/Ghent will seem very quaint and pretty but probably won't get under your skin like London will.
I'd go with London > Paris > Amsterdam. All achievable in 8 days as the trains are quick and reliable (and you can snooze on them if you need to recharge your batteries) although I'm sure you'll wish you had longer in all three cities. I used to commute between London and Paris and would often do London>Paris>London>Paris>London between Mon & Thurs. It's not tiring at all....plenty of people travel for much longer each day standing up on squashed full trains into London (and paying a premium for the "pleasure") to work and back. One Eurostar and one Thalys over the space of 8 days is hardly going to wipe you out.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that London is not a million times better than Bruges. The question for the OP to consider is whether 3 large cities can be adequately experienced in a week for a first time visitor to Europe. Personally, I think London is worth a trip in itself.
Also, while I agree with your thoughts on commuting via train, remember that the OP could possibly be tired or have jet lag after a flight. I think I'd be disappointed in leaving London before I was ready!
Another option is London & Paris only, but it seems the OP has already booked a return flight from AMS. One day in Amsterdam seems like a waste to me.