I don't actually remember if I had two or three cut-outs
I think three, but again, my car was very early (#62) and I made the mod almost two years ago:crazyeyes . I'd like to believe they did a better job on the openings on later cars, but I'll have to hear from others on that subject.
OPINION - As far as crash structure, look at the rib, be your own judge. You can feel the thickness of the top of the rib through the factory opening. You could conceivably say the beam is not as strong due to the removal of fillet corner on the front edge.....My opinion is fiberglass is a LOUSY impact material (well that's just fact). It's brittle and shatters right away without absorbing much enegy. Strong within its limits, but sudden and ugly in failure (my family had a boat company when I was young, I saw lots of fiberglass failure boats vs docks, briges, piers, etc). I believe the desirable quality of any impact absorption device is to deform and absorb energy over distance and sacrifice itself, not shatter and be of little consequence or be so rigid as to deliver an impact shot right to the footwell/frame. Remember, its that sudden stop that sends your brains out though your nostrils:no: ....The change I made is miniscule (this is the opinion part), but again be your own judge. Heck, it might have improved the crash absorbing cabability for all I know by introducing a new shape that deforms better before it shatters

.
A bit off topic but sort of relevant...Chapman recognized this way back in the early cars. I can remember updating my Elan with nice shiny big tubular a-arms over the original stamped steel channels because I thought strong and heavy was always good. Then a revered Lotus tuner pointed out that now any curb impact that I had was going to send the shot straight to the stressed skin frame rather than the orignal a-arms sacrificing themselves.....much more expensive proposition to replace a frame than replace a-arms...Chapman was a genius because everything was sized correctly for the job, no more, no less and he tried to get multiple uses out of parts (frame sections carrying vacuum is an example). He seemed to more get more performance (at least the kind of performance I like) from the sum of the parts than other manufacturers.
I'm sure there are some structural, civil or mechanical engineers with the proper education that can weigh in on this subject.
Good Luck