Michael Felton- certainly you know by now that the informed opinion of this site holds formalized ratings in low regard. I like WH-O and would play it again without much prompting, but it would not make my Top 100 list. Golf is a big world- to each his own.
JK- I perceived the two courses very differently. S-Black looked to me like strips and pieces of turf enveloped by a sea of sand bunkers, waste areas and native scrub. The very rustic site may not have much elevation in terms of the difference between the lowest and highest points, but it felt like I was often ascending and descending (I don't know how much was created by Hanse & Co. vs. Mosaic mining, though I understand that they had to haul quite a bit of sandy material in). My impression was that the ground had a lot of movement to it and the stances and lies were infrequently flat.
The greens at B-S are like nothing I have ever seen in terms of size, contouring and internal movement (Champions in Houston is known for its large greens, but they are smaller with much tamer contours). If you found the strategy to be self-evident at S-B, either you are extremely perceptive or have a different understanding of what strategy. It would take me many rounds to figure out what sections of the greens to avoid at all costs (I was overwhelmed by the greens at all three Streamsong courses). S-B has a links look and feel, and encourages the ground game.
Perhaps WH-O, being more traditional and familiar in style to me, just seemed to be straightforward. The scale is smaller and proportional to the site. My recollection is that it was also flatter, or at least that it was an easy walk. I don't remember pondering the lines of play excessively and the greens didn't fool me much. Like I noted earlier, I was even par or +1 over the last 14 holes and don't remember hitting the ball all that well (was pulling my tee shots). WH-O is a parkland course with some heather, but perhaps not as much as some in the area. A stark contrast to S-B, in my estimation.