despite my name, i will try to be unbiased here about stanford vs. ucla. i think they are both great programs in great locations with reasonably good lifestyles. i know a couple of recent resident graduates from ucla who are practicing in the LA area quite well, and they both told me that they would pick stanford right now over ucla. in regards to the operative experience, they said that they felt comfortable in knowing how to do most procedures in general orthopaedics as well as their subspecialty, but that they still felt like they were acquiring a basic comfort level doing procedures on their own during their fellowship as well as their first few years of training. in other words, they were well-versed in how things are done but spent a lot of time after residency acquiring the basic surgical skills that many people would like to acquire during residency and build on in fellowship and practice. having said that, i don't think it makes a big difference in the end because residents from both programs ultimately match well for fellowships and do well in practice. i do think that stanford is significantly stronger if your interests are in hand, sports, joints, or spine. ucla's big hand guy, neil jones, recently left for uci, so uci definitely has a better hand department right now. and i do believe they get to operate much more at uci and stanford (and also ucsf and uc davis for that matter) than at ucla. usually that comes at the expense of going to a lesser name program that is not as academic for those who want to eventually go into academics, but in the case of stanford, as well as ucsf and uc davis, it's the best of both worlds. that's just my opinion based on talking to ucla resident graduates and being quite familiar with the stanford program.