Tom,
Thanks for keeping me on track. I'll post some more comments on the Addington and WH after work; in the meantime here is my feeble explanation of why I like TOC.
Rich,
Well said about the ultimate aim of this pastime of matching cards and this website in general; it's to learn about golf architecture. My feeling about the match of cards is that it is a great stimulator of debate and, therefore, a good thing.
I'll pick up the gauntlet, although, having only played TOC once (although I walked it each day for a week while in St. Andrews), I might not be the best champion. To begin, I must note that I find your singling out of the first six holes a little curious. I find them very much in character with the rest of the course and what I like about it (as discussed below). I also dislike the amount of blind drives. I do not dislike the blindness of the drives because I think them unfair, but rather because with all those neat little (and not so little) pot bunkers out there, and all the beautiful fairway undulations, I miss the excitement of watching my ball land and bound along the links. I digress, however, as I am supposed to be defending these holes.
Even before I had played the course, by walking it and studying a yardage book, I could see different possibilities for attacking the pin depending on the line taken off the tee. The width of the fairways allow two players, or even 4, to have extremely different challenges in approaching the hole; and, therefore, once they are aware of the challenges presented from the different areas of approach, choose the one best suited to their game. In short, the fairway width, the plethora of bunkers and fairway undulations give the golfer lots of choices with different challenges to each. An ancillary benefit to this is that a mis-struck ball will usually allow for a heroic recovery, but will also likely require a shot much different than what the golfer intended (a low running draw rather than a high cut, for example) and thereby affords the possibility of thrilling matches for both the scratch and long handicap player.
Another reason why I love the Old Course, including the first six holes, are the beautiful green contours and how naturally they blend directly into the fairway (there are a couple of pancake flat greens, no. 9 for example, but this a welcome breather from some of the roller coaster rides that come before and after. Certainly I think the shots at the old course become more interesting the closer you get to the hole. Often, when chipping or pitching (at your average course) you will have a certain primary task (e.g. carry a bunker and land it soft, or judge the amount of left to right break of the chip). At TOC, if you are taking the land route to the hole, it is not out of the question to have a quadruple breaking chip! Of course you can always try to fly it to the hole, but for some reason, the ground game seems to work better (at least for me and I'm from California where flying it in is the rule), and I find it a lot of fun.
As for the first hole, admittedly, the tee shot must be the easiest shot in golf. Nevertheless, how many golfers put their tee shots ob right? The pressure of hitting in front of a larger gallery than most golfers have ever played in front of before or will ever play in front of again is a great feeling. I also think it is an integral part of the course as when is there not a gallery at the first at St. Andrews? After placing your tee shot, I have to disagree that the approach to the green is boring. If the pin is placed anywhere in the front half of the green, you have to flirt with the Swilcan burn if you want a reasonable chance at your 3. I love that shot and look forward to playing it again. Of course you can always just knock your approach to the back center of the green, but if your opponent in a match is willing to take some chances, you might find yourself one down in a hurry.
To summarize why I like these holes, and the entire course in general, I would say it is very strategic and natural and a lot of fun to play (especially in a match). I would like to see the result of my drives more, but if I were to give the course a greater criticism, it would be that it no longer is a true representative of Scottish golf (although it might not have been for a while as I believe Darwin spoke of the ballot as well). I say this because when I think of Scottish golf, I think of pitching up to Dornoch at 4:00PM and thinking that the course was closed because nobody was around (and the starter, when unable to find me a caddy, putting his clipboard down and looping my bag for me on my first tour of the course); I think of sub 3 hour rounds and I think of pulling off amazing shots and looking around at the empty links and laughing. I can't really hold that against St. Andrews as its popularity has made it so, but it prevents me from thinking of St. Andrews as the place I wish I were when I'm ready to get a way and play some golf.