Air carrier landing SFO with fuel concerns voiced concern regarding NCT handling; recommending continued holding in lieu of extensive vectoring for sequence.

Narrative

We had boarded about 2;900 LBS of hold and contingency fuel because of weather in SFO and notes from the Dispatcher stating that SFO was 3 airplanes over capacity at our arrival time. Planned landing fuel was 7;600 LBS. Upon arrival into the SFO area; we were told to expect holding at LOZIT. At approximately XA40L we received holding clearance at LOZIT with an EFC of XB15L. We calculated that we had enough fuel to do this and still have adequate fuel reserves. At about XB10L we received clearance to go direct SFO and to expect a visual approach to Runway 28L. At this time we still had about 6;200 LBS of fuel on board. After SFO we were given descent clearances and vectors out to the west; away from the airport. There were many aircraft in the air and it was very difficult to determine what the exact order of arrival was. We were given progressively lower altitudes and slower airspeeds; resulting in a much higher fuel burn. After about 20 minutes of this; our fuel state was now down to 4;700 LBS. The weather in SFO was VFR this whole time. I asked my First Officer to see how much longer it would be until final; and the Controller said to expect another 20 mile vector; then a 20 mile downwind. Doing this would have resulted in an emergency fuel state; so at this point we declared 'minimum fuel' and were vectored toward the final approach. We landed about 10 minutes later. Landing fuel was 3;400 LBS. SFO is notorious for giving delay vectors which make it very difficult for the air crews to plan fuel burn. Staying in holding until an approach with minimal delay can be made is much more preferable because it provides a much more predictable fuel burn. These low altitude; low airspeed; indeterminate delay vectors that SFO employs creates situations such as this and make for a less than safe operating environment.