I certainly benefitted from knowing the rules, but I'm not going to apologize for it. I read the rulebook before the season started, and reviewed it a few times during the season whenever I questioned something. Am I the second fastest guy racing +40 class? Heck no. Not even close. But you have to be IN it to WIN it.
I am being rewarded for being consistent, and more importantly, being a supporter of the OMA. I knew and understood the rules and requirements BEFORE the season started, and that is MY responsibility as a participant in any event (life, included). Granted, communication from OMA could have been more clear and complete at the racetrack, but the rules themselves were crystal clear. It is not up to them to read you the rulebook at each race.
Living where I do, racing OMA isn't really the logical choice for me. CRA tracks are WAY closer. But I choose the OMA because I like how their series' are run, and the tracks, etc. I chose the OMA specifically because I can't (or don't want to have to) race 20 or 25 times a year. But I participate as much as I can, for myself, and for my sponsors. Having the minimum number of race requirement isn't anything new, so I'm a bit surprised some seem to be caught off guard by it. The requirement makes perfect sense, and is there to promote more participation and boost rider turnout.
I didn't 'buy' my way in, I participated my way in, in accordance with the rule book. If more riders had participated in more races, and I had finished outside the awards cutoff, then so be it. The most important thing is that I finished the season in the same number of pieces I started it in, and had a BLAST racing everyone in my classes along the way.