They're going to wait and see what affect the DRS and Pirelli tyres have before considering making changes to the circuit in 2012. On the one hand, I think that this might be a good idea as those two long straights should provide enough track for the DRS to work. On the other I think if the fundamental track design is poor, then they should change it regardless - not all motorsport has DRS after all.
The organisers make a fair point. Pirelli and DRS should in theory produce more overtaking and make the race more exciting - at least more exciting than last year's race. I believe regardless of this, the track is just **** and clearly needs tweaking. Pirelli and DRS are no guarantee of an exciting race if the track is fundamentally flawed. We saw that in Valencia, and even with the longer straights in Abu Dhabi, I reckon we'll see another dull race with drivers struggling to overtake - but maybe not as extreme as Hamilton on fresh tyres unable to overtake a Renault on worn tyres.
Is it just me, or do these sort of news stories always beg the same question: Why didn't they (Tilke) do it right the first time around? F1 has been going 60 years, and motorsport itself longer still. I count 68 tracks (including India) that have/will host GP's by the end of this year, and many of those have had many variations, so why haven't the lessons been learnt? If a group of us on a forum can discuss how best to maximise a track for overtaking, using evidence from existing tracks, why can't Tilke and co? I know it's an old argument, without a real conclusion, but I'd love to see an interview with Tilke where these questions are put to him. Not quite on topic, but did anyone know Tilke has been contracted to build a race track in Norway?