(I'd like to see other people give their opinion.)

The problems are:

— I don't understand what 'sporter' means;

— but if I understand it correctly—by seeing the use made of this category—this class is a hotch-potch in which are mixed at least two categories, the bikes being sold to look aggressive, fast, mean, etc. (with double inheritance, grands prix and Mad Max), and the bikes that were made for racing;

— to me the first class mixed-in, the 'aggressive looking' one, should be in 'road' but obviously it is not (that is the origin of my miscomprehension of the thing);

— those two-in-a-bag are very different, though, at least on one criterium which is used to separate other vehicles: one is street legal (whatever the ad-men make believe), the other is not.

So, I do think we should separate.

It can been reached by making 'sporter' reserved to racing motorbikes (but, as I'm not sure to understand the first reason which has lead to the creation of this category, maybe someone will remind this reason to me and shows me that I'm wrong to expell the 'aggressive kind' from 'sporter').

Or by creating 'racer', which should be clear enough a name not to make confusion anymore, while up-loading and ranking the vehicles.

I would add this: there is a third solution, my favourite, a) expelling the 'aggressive looking' in 'road' and b) creating 'racer', third solution which has the enormous advantage—for me—to make disappear this ambiguous 'sporter' class which classes nothing but confuses everyone—at least, my poor self.

Side note: there are, as far as I can judge without pointing and counting individuals, much more 'aggressive looking' than real 'racers' in this 'sporter' class. So the separation should be easy, whichever way to separate is chosen.