Motogp bikes have changed recently from higher horsepower beasts that rewarded rear wheel steering front wheel controlled high speed turn in racing that rewards the rider with the fewest mistakes. Not so great this year and last.
I would like to see: the drivers be able to use more of the tracks width developing two or three groves; the drivers have to modulate the throttle more instead of stretching throttle cables from constantly being flat footed; breaks being used to scrub off speed for turn entry; penalties for blocking and break checks….(.what if race control deactivated one or two cylinders for infractions…) More power/less aerodynamic grip.

I’m not arguing against diversity and competition among equipment suppliers (I miss the Goodyear/Firestone rivalry), but I think the effect of parity is overstated when you still have two teams who consistently lead, another couple who consistently run fast, and a couple who always run last. Penske/Gassassi always seem to shave fractions from their pit stops, they make fewer mistakes in the pits, their drivers generally don’t scuff the walls. Little things add up.

The flip side of this: go back to–I think it was 1994? Penske had the MB engine and blew everyone off the track that year. Nigel Mansell was with Newman-Haas and said everyone else was racing for Best of Class. Fun if you’re a Penske fan, but frustrating if you’re interested in anyone else. You ask yourself, am I watching a great driver and a great car, or could Milka Duno dominate in that thing? If the answer’s the latter, a lot of interesting things about racing evaporate.