Quote Originally Posted by Renton
Quote Originally Posted by biondino
All those players who play 200nl+ will tell you the same thing, there is little difference between 25nl and 100nl.

And here's the paradox. To a player at 200NL or above of course there is little difference between 25 and 100, because you can comfortably beat both. For a player at 25 to move up to 100 and expect to pwn it is simply wrong. A winning player at 50 *should* be able to beat 100, but if they are running say 2b//100 at 50 they could very easily be a LOSING player when they move up - the margins are still very small.

There is a massive difference between 25 and 100. Full stop. The former is loose and passive, the latter is far more aggressive. Far more. At 25NL, a pre-flop re-raise is a rarity. If you can't play good post-flop poker, don't move up to 100 unless you are damn sure you're going to nut camp and do so effectively. Even then, you won't be improving at poker unless you're a much better observer than most.

Most of Miffed's post is excellent, but I simply don't think mid-stakes players are able to empathise with the perspective of a low-stakes player because they have (necessarily) moved into a different plane of understanding.
We've discussed this via aim. I think you are correct in saying that midstakes players aren't going to be perceptive to the major differences in difficulty from 25nl to 100nl. However, it kinda goes both ways. By having never played >100nl yourself, you aren't aware of the huge difference that exists between .5/1 and 1/2, 1/2 and 2/4. The difference in difficulty of these stakes is such that the difference in difficulty from 25nl to 100nl is negligible in comparison.
But that's not the point! Low-stakes players have never played above $100NL so it's something they simply don't know! What they DO know, and DO experience, is a significant difference between 25 and 100 which is hugely magnified by their relative lack in skill because they're that much less able to deal with good players.