help require regarding taking relief

[Foxholer]

the path and edgings are not part of the hazard, I can only assume that it was easier to paint the stones rather than but stakes in right next to the edging.

What makes you say they aren't? LR? According to the definition of a LWH, if a ball is touching the boundary of the hazard, it's in the hazard. Of course, that definition only deals with stakes and lines, not with (painted) stones!

 

[rulefan]

As there are no stakes or paintewd lines to define the hazard, I suspect the LR says the margin is defined by the water side of the stones. As I said earlier, the alternative presents problems.

 

[louise_a]

there is nothing in the LR that mentions the painted stones, purely that you can get relief from man made paths and their edgings.

I wonder what the ruling would be if a ball actually finished on top of the stones marked in red,

 

[Foxholer]

there is nothing in the LR that mentions the painted stones, purely that you can get relief from man made paths and their edgings.

I wonder what the ruling would be if a ball actually finished on top of the stones marked in red,

Provided it is deemed to be the boundary of the LWH, then ball is in the hazard.

However, there is no reference to stones as being acceptable as a boundary for the hazard. So either a LR or a Decision would be required to ratify the intention. An LR would be the obvious one. It could also confirm that the boundary is along the edging, rather than straight lines between each red stone and whether the inside edge of the edging is actually part of the hazard. A bit of care is required and needs a better LR-phraser than me.