People seem to write the strangest articles regarding fairness and the show. WSBK is a good show b/c the bikes all make roughly the same horsepower and many manufacturers participate. WSBK is a bad show b/c the bikes are production based which means major updates to the frame or the engine must flow through the production line. Developing a bike through the production channels takes several years and costs a great deal of money, plus, companies have to convince people to buy it. For this reason, bikes can be off the pace for years.
MotoGP will never have stagnant development, and I am deeply disappointed that Honda and Yamaha are so afraid to horsepower cap the sport at 81mm (260hp) if they increase fuel capacity. In MotoGP the manufacturers can introduce new parts at every round. They can change from a V-4 to an I-4 during an event if they were so inclined, and the GP rapid prototyping facilities can churn out scores of one-off parts that would otherwise be illegal in WSBK. My only gripe with the current 81mm limitation is that it requires a 4-cylinder rule. If they would just stroke limit the class at 48.5mm, a lot more engine configurations would be legal. Dynamic prototyping and cutting edge technology is what sets MotoGP apart from WSBK.
I don't agree with the nonsense about limiting technology in order to make the racing better. If technology is going to be limited, it's b/c rider aids take away the skill necessary to ride a bike. Limited technology doesn't necessarily make racing closer. A lot of new technology was added between the mid 1980s and 2006, yet the racing was no less amazing during the 2006 season. If they will just add fuel, it's straight back to the 990s. Rossi puts a big mushy balloon on the front wheel, he brakes 10-15 meters later than everyone else, blocks the hell out of them at the apex, and then cracks open the throttle to exit. Everyone adopts the same basic strategy. They don't need to limit technology b/c no amount of technology is going to navigate a rider through a block pass. Riders can't block pass ATM b/c they don't have the fuel or the torque to pull it off without losing lots of time.
I do tend to agree with GP One about the tires, but I don't blame Bridgestone b/c WSBK has a similar problem. With a strictly regulated control tire--a control tire contract in which the supplier only brings a few design variants to each event--some manufacturers figure it out and others suffer. Either increase the investment so Bridgestone supply many variants that suit a wide variety of riding styles and chassis designs, or figure out a way to restore the tire war. I actually think they are doing the latter now that Dorna have hired the ex-racing-director from Bridgestone. If so, they need to hurry it up!
I suspect the FIM/IMS/Dorna/MSMA know all of these things, but reaching a consensus is probably quite difficult. The horsepower cap is obviously a sticky wicket for the MSMA who seem hellbent on making sure that all bikes do NOT make equal horsepower in MotoGP. Terrible shame b/c the manufacturers who are spooked by a horsepower cap have a technology portfolio that is decades ahead of the manufacturers who do not currently participate in MotoGP. They won't be easily caught regardless of the fuel rules.
