Cactus, Okay if I read you right then your belief appears to be that the 2 strokes of the same CC have an unfair advantage of some kind. On the other hand you agree that the 4 strokes yield faster lap times. One could claim you've contradicted yourself.
What you wrote about making more bottom end in the 2 stroke, is exactly what I was one about in a previous posting in this thread. Agreed.
You can't have it so that one engine that's burning more dynamic capacity is allowed to race a much higher strung engine that's burning half the dynamic capacity
Hey, ask yourself "why not". Seriously. The overall objectives for the FIM and AMA etc, are basic things like: increased rider participation (of all ages and skills levels and budgets), increased spectator attendance, and so on. Those organisations have a tough job trying to keep everyone happy. I think in offroad enduros they are on the right track with many categories and overall winners often coming from different categories. In MX it is not so simple, due to the need to cater for juniors, and yet 250F vs 450F performance diffs now coming down to nil. The cost thing is a big issue. With your "you can't ..." claim, I think you are not thinking outside the square.
I am not claiming I have all the answers. Far from it. *If* I am making a statement of any kind, then it would only be that the industry (and nobodies like us) need to be open minded - and ignore marketing fluff from companies like Honda who have put themselves hard in one corner. It's sounds like you have a soft spot for the 2 stroke just like I do. I used to race them too, and drop in new pistons in 60 mins and check my squish bands and so on. I know you also love your 4 strokes. But in MX and SX, the 250F and even 450F maint schedules are a nightmare for the average amateur or parent. If my little man grows up and wants to race MX, then no way could I support him on one of today's 250Fs. Things have to change. in NZ they have, and good on them.