I feel like this rule from the WSOP isn't entirely correct:

108. Protect Your Hand: participants must protect their own hands at all times. A protected hand is defined as a hand sitting on the table surface with a card cap (see Rule 110) placed on top of the hand. If a dealer or participant kills or fouls an unprotected hand, the participant will have no redress and will not be entitled to his or her chips back that were wagered in the hand. If the participant initiated a bet or raise and hasn’t been called, the uncalled bet or raise will be returned to the participant.

The above rule references rule 110 which defines a "card cap":

110. Foreign Objects: There will be no foreign objects on the table except for a maximum of one card cap (also known as a card protector). Card caps can be no larger than two (2) inches in diameter and no more than one-half (1/2) inch in depth. Participants may not place any food or beverages on the poker table with the exception of one (1) capped bottle of water.

I feel like the universally accepted definition of a protected hand would be more similar to:

A player's cards are considered protected if they are partially covered by one of the following:

• card cap
• one or more of the player's chips
• the player's hand or fingers

(Perhaps the allowed capped water bottle would be a legal protector too.)

My questions:

1. Is protecting your cards with chips or your fingers simply too obvious to mention, or could a player's hand with a single chip on it (instead of a card cap) really not be considered "protected"?

2. The rules don't specify what would happen if a protected hand was accidentally mucked. AFAIK this has never happened in the WSOP, but what would the rule be if it did happen? (As an aside, here's a famous example of an unprotected hand that was accidentally mucked in the WSOP.)

I feel like this rule from the WSOP isn't entirely correct:

108. Protect Your Hand: participants must protect their own hands at all times. A protected hand is defined as a hand sitting on the table surface with a card cap (see Rule 110) placed on top of the hand. If a dealer or participant kills or fouls an unprotected hand, the participant will have no redress and will not be entitled to his or her chips back that were wagered in the hand. If the participant initiated a bet or raise and hasn’t been called, the uncalled bet or raise will be returned to the participant.

The above rule references rule 110 which defines a "card cap":

110. Foreign Objects: There will be no foreign objects on the table except for a maximum of one card cap (also known as a card protector). Card caps can be no larger than two (2) inches in diameter and no more than one-half (1/2) inch in depth. Participants may not place any food or beverages on the poker table with the exception of one (1) capped bottle of water.

I feel like the universally accepted definition of a protected hand would be more similar to:

A player's cards are considered protected if they are partially covered by one of the following:

• card cap
• one or more of the player's chips
• the player's hand or fingers

(Perhaps the allowed capped water bottle would be a legal protector too.)

My questions:

1. Is protecting your cards with chips or your fingers simply too obvious to mention, or could a player's hand with a single chip on it (instead of a card cap) really not be considered "protected"?

2. The rules don't specify what would happen if a protected hand was accidentally mucked. AFAIK this has never happened in the WSOP, but what would the rule be if it did happen? (As an aside, here's a famous example of an unprotected hand that was accidentally mucked in the WSOP.)

Update: Apparently rule 108 which I quoted is simply incomplete, and does implicitly allow for protecting your cards with your hand or chips. Plain as day on the WSOP rules summary, it states:

Protecting your own hand is one of the most important things a player must do. Players may use their hands, chips, or another object on top of their cards to protect them. Those who do not protect their hand have no recourse if there is an issue.

Interestingly, that sentence implies that if your hand is protected, you might have some "recourse". I interpret that to mean if a protected hand were mucked by the dealer, perhaps it would be handled on a case by case basis.