There is no passing at Leicester beyond the second bend. The track has fundamental flaws in terms of the relationship between the length, width and shape. It's big but somehow has no space!
I've not been to Redcar but it's small and I'm told that the banking on the third/forth bends cannot be used effectively due to the small nature of the track.
Buxton is too small, narrow, rough and not even level.
Weymouth was too small and narrow.
I never saw Trelawny but it was small. The same goes for Plymouth.
Somerset is an interesting one. I've been once (Somerset v Stoke) and considering how people talked it up I was totally unimpressed. I remember one race, Cunningham v Staechmann. The best Staechmann could manage was to get his front wheel level with Cunningham's back wheel. There were some close races but precious little passing. I also saw a Somerset match on Sky, that was good admittedly. I would say Somerset is one of the better tracks in the country but most others are pretty poor so it's not saying much. I think it could be better still.
Scunthorpe I've not seen, it's talked up like Somerset is but I think it's smaller?
Wimbledon was narrow and had a poor surface I understand.
Birmingham isn't particularly conducive to passing from what I've seen on the TV, I don't know the reason for that, whether it's size, shape, width, surface or a combination of all those. Also viewing is poor at the stadium, how bizarre.
Have I missed any? Probably.
The rules in regards to track size need changing, min length should be 300m. The minimum widths on straights and bends need to be increased.
The common thread running through this is that most modern tracks have been short.
Proper speedway tracks are big, wide and fast with multiple lines.
The Polish and Swedish tracks I've seen on TV are far better than most British tracks, length, width and surface.
I'd guess you'd disagree with most of what I say above as you think they are all "fine".