These two club/courses are geographically adjacent, but not too similar, as described in part above. But since the flavor of the month is the Golfweek rankings, I will use their published ratings criteria as a guide to comparing these two courses...which Golfweek rates at approx 9.5 and 9.1 in favor of SFGC (note I am not a rater so I don't have the benefit of training in the application of these criteria).
I will use a 10 point must system so the leader of a category will by definition get 10 points. A couple of the categories seem more pass/fail by nature and I have no idea what a walk in the park means so they will both pass that one as well.
Ease and intimacy of routing - this should be a tie because both courses follow the natural contours but with the 10 point system I am forced to go 10/9 in favor of OC because the redo at SF at 13 onward is "forced" when the criteria grades whether the holes are unforced. THere are no forced holes at OC.
Integrity of original design - this by first glance should go 10/8 to OC because of the much chronicled changes to the back nine at SF, but one must remember that OC itself has changed much since it was first layed out. Is that bad, by definition? I don't think so but I would give this a 10/8.5 to OC.
Natural setting and Overall Land plan - this is a 10 for SF, and the question is whether the (few) cart paths at OC, the apartment buildings behind 5 tee and 12 green (how the hell were those ever allowed to be built) push OC down to an 8. For today, I will assume they don't...10/9 to SF.
Interest of greens and surrounding contours - a 10 for SF and somewhere around an 8-9 for OC...this is the strength of SF, and at OC the greens are smaller, flatter, a bit slower, tougher to judge, perhaps, and the bunkering is getting a bit tired. 10/8.5 to SF.
Variety and memorability of par 3's - I would go 10/9 to SF because there is more variety in the 3's, 8 and 15 at OC are maybe a bit too similar in length and SF has the fun and definitely memorable #7.
Same for par 4's - 10/9 to OC, the strength of the Lake cse are the 4's that come in all lengths, directions and contours. SF has some really good 4s as well, though...2, 3 and 10 stand out...but also has 13 and 16 which aren't to the standard of the rest. At OC really only 10 is not to the standard of the rest, IMO.
Same for par 5's - not a great strength of either, relative to courses of this overall calibre, but here I would go 10/9 to OC simply because there is no 5 par at SF that is the equal of 16 at OC...a hole that does not just rely on length for its challenge...the rolling fairways that cant a bt to the left while the hole requires you to favor the right side to have an approach to the green...great fun and a real reality check at that point in the round...a 5 there is well earned, even with today's technology.
Condtioning - an unfair fight, given level of play, but this is a closer 10/9 than you'd expect because of the awesome work done by Pat Finlen the super at OC...the fairways and greens are in tremendous condition there.
Landscape and tree management - hmmm, not sure how to grade this since OC has really opened things up in the last year...remarkable really, and someone who hasn't seen 1-6 in a while would marvel at it. SF never really had a tree issue...so I guess it gets the edge, but I would go 10/9.5 in SF's favor with a full expectation that later this year the two will be absolutely equal as the last bits of extra trees are removed from the OC property.
Walk in the park - yes, I would be happy spending 4 hours at either. I have no idea how to grade this on a relative scale.
Totals using the 10 point must system - OC 85, SF 85.5. From my stat classes in business school...not statistically significant...enjoy both!