My ball lies within the boundary of a water hazard, but still in the grass with a good lie and quite playable. But directly in front of my ball, about six inches, is a metal stake. The stake is in the water, protruding above the surface of the pond just enough that it is highly likely that I will hit the stake as I swing through the ball. The stake is not a hazard marker, it appears to be marking where the fairway drainage system empties into the pond. The stake is not easily movable.

I could chip the ball out sideways. Or I could take a drop out of the hazard for a stroke penalty. But is there any free relief? The verge of grass between the hazard line and the actual pond is rather narrow but it is conceivable that if a free drop is allowed, I might be able to drop within the hazard without the ball going into the pond.
Click to view attachment
Thanks for any advice.

Sorry...no relief.
Said stake is in the hazard, and even if easily moved...
you can't without penalty.
(and the grass within the hazard is merely a non-wet part of the hazard.)

Based on you're drawing...with any kind of playable lie...I count my blessings
and advance the ball as far up the fairway as possible (don't ground the club).

Now, if I can't advance the ball, and can only chip out sideways....
a choice to make....
can I guarantee that my pitch out will put me in a *substantially better* place than the drop
that would cost me the same stroke. I have seen numerous occasion where the drop
is a much safer play.

No relief.

Rich is spot on...no such thing as relief in anything marked as a hazard.

OK. I think I can live with the rulings and replies so far as quite fair and reasonable. But here is a wrinkle.

In the actual happenstance, several days ago, the yellow line marking the boundary of the hazard was absent. When I asked later in the pro shop for a ruling, the asst pro noted that to begin with, it was a poorly marked hazard and lo and behold a day or two later it is marked with a yellow line. But without the line and with the edge of the water actually protruding outside of a line drawn between the two most relevant hazard marker stakes I could find, what is available to me?

My ball is not in the water. The grass is taller than fairway grass, but I don't necessarily have to assume that tall grass is a hazard without other indications. More like a second cut of rough. The stake is obviously in the pond, thus presumably in the hazard.

Can declare the stake an obstruction, even though it is in the hazard? I would argue that my ball is not in the hazard unless there is some kind of line or boundary stakes or whatever to indicate otherwise. So then would I get free relief?

Thanks for your patience with me on this.

The imaginary line between the two visible stakes is your hazard line. The water line is irrelevant.
You get no relief from any obstruction within the hazard line.
Outside the hazard line you are entitled to any applicable through the green relief Rules.

Ahhhh. That's the key. In this case, both the ball and the stake were outside the imaginary line between the two closest marker stakes, thus neither were in the hazard (even though the stake was in the water).

Thanks, Mr. Rope.

If the stakes cut off a piece of the water hazard, the water hazard is poorly marked, and the player cannot benefit from a poor marking. Water outside the imaginary line is not casual water.

If the ball and the metal object is clearly within the natural margins of the hazard, there's no free relief, and the player must drop the ball under the water hazard Rule if it can't be played as it lies.

26/2 Ball Within Natural Margin of Water Hazard But Outside Stakes Defining Margin

Q. Stakes defining the margin of a water hazard were improperly installed. As a result, an area which clearly was part of the water hazard was outside the stakes and, thus, technically was outside the hazard. A player’s ball came to rest in water in this area. The player claimed that, in view of the alignment of the stakes, his ball was in casual water through the green. Was the claim valid?

A. No. The Committee erred in not properly defining the margin of the hazard as required by Rule 33-2a, but a player is not entitled to take advantage of such an error. Since it was clear that the place where the player’s ball lay was within the natural boundaries of the water hazard, the claim should not be upheld.

Oh, no. I thought it was too good to be true if both ball and stake were technically outside the hazard.

So now it would appear that the stake is clearly in the pond and therefore in the hazard, regardless of boundary markings. But the ball is outside the hazard. Even so, I get no relief because there is no such thing as an obstruction inside a hazard. Is that correct?

If your ball is outside the natural margins of the hazard, and the immovable obstruction in inside the water hazard, you'll get relief if there's interference with your stance or the area of the intended swing.

Why do you think that there's no such thing as an obstruction in a hazard? In a water hazard there's no free relief from an immovable obstruction, but you'll get free relief in a bunker.

Thanks for clearing that up for me GolfIsMyGame. My golf buddies and I have been having quite a discussion over this. No money or friendships on the line though.