At least we're cooler than Cleveland.

But for the young and the unattached, Pittsburgh still trails most large U.S. metropolitan areas in desirability, according to new rankings from Forbes.com.

The Cities
1	Denver-Boulder
2	Boston
3	Phoenix
4	San Francisco- Oakland
5	New York
6	Raleigh-Durham
7	Seattle
8	Austin
9	Washington- Baltimore
10	Miami
11	Columbus
12	Philadelphia
13	Sacramento
14	Minneapolis-St Paul
15	New Orleans
16	Atlanta
17	Milwaukee
18	San Diego
19	Los Angeles
20	Providence
21	Las Vegas
22	Chicago
23	Nashville
24	Orlando
25	Charlotte
26	Cincinnati
27	Portland
28	Indianapolis
29	Dallas-Fort Worth
30	Kansas City
31	St Louis
32	Pittsburgh
33	Detroit
34	Houston
35	Tampa
36	Salt Lake City
37	Cleveland
38	San Antonio
39	Norfolk
40	Greensboro

Dropping from 29th to 32nd on this year's list of the best cities for singles, Pittsburgh once again lagged in job growth, "coolness" and nightlife. A low cost of living, however, was one factor in its favor.

Cleveland -- despite the presence of the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame and the lively Warehouse District -- ranked 37th among the 40 metropolitan areas measured by Forbes.com.

Denver was No. 1 -- for the second year in a row.

Greensboro, N.C. -- or "Greensboring," as some locals have called it, according to Forbes.com -- was last at No. 40.

While Pittsburgh lost ground in this year's survey, its ranking is still an improvement from a three-year period in 2002, 2003 and 2004 when the city ranked dead last, a performance that prompted a lot of hand-wringing from the many local organizations dedicated to changing Pittsburgh's image nationally.

The unwanted publicity even inspired the creation of the Pittsburgh Singles Volunteer Network -- which closed its doors last month -- and led angry Pittsburghers to bombard one Forbes.com writer with more than 240 e-mails, one deriding the survey as "easily the most irresponsible piece of journalism I've ever seen."

Forbes.com used seven measurements this year to arrive at its rankings: projected job growth, number of bars and clubs, culture, cost of living, number of singles as a percentage of the metro area population, online dating and amount of "coolness" as measured by Carnegie Mellon University's Kevin Stolarick and Richard Florida, formerly of CMU.

This year, Pittsburgh's worst performance was its number of online Match.com dating profiles per capita (33rd) and projected job growth over the next five years (32nd). It did not fare much better with nightlife (30th) or "coolness" (31st). Nightlife is the number of bars, restaurants and nightclubs per capita. "Coolness" is a combination of an area's diversity and number of "creative workers" -- artists, scientists, teachers and musicians.

Pittsburgh, though, performed well when measuring the cost of living single, a calculation that includes entry-level salary data, the cost of a Pizza Hut pizza, average apartment rent, movie ticket and a six pack of Heineken. It was fifth best out of 40 cities in that category.

Cleveland -- ha! -- was 35th.