A few months ago I was that guy looking to take a step into the 22's and decided to do a little homework lol. Only to find a thread that was saying that the 22's are a piece of cake ie. even the regs are aweful etc. Which fed my ego only to get crushed down and put in my place twice before finally mastering and profiting in them. For OP, I'll give u my 2 cents. U need to realise 2 things namely:
i) the question you've asked is really vague and cannot exactly be answered. If you ask Phil Ivey this question he'll probably say what you've been hearing on this thread alreay ie. everyone at the 22's is aweful and there isnt much of a difference with the 10's. Ask the same question to a winning reg at the 22's and he'll give u a different answer ie. when someone's answers such a question they answer relative to their skill level.
ii) That being said, perhaps I can rephrase that question for you to make the answer you get sligthly more helpful for you as a player. I realise that the main reason why I suffered the fat of the hammer was because I asked the question. Really your question should be:
"What can a player who is moving up to the 20's from the 10's expect to see as far as gameplay goes."

So true rly. Then they come here and make threads about how to handle the variance when they lose half they BR in one night. If it doesn't affect you,sure an aggressive BRM might be better for you,but if the swings bother you just play where are you are somewhat comfortable.

As for the OP,sample size really. Don;t get how ppl come here posting 70 games hhs and ask if maybe variance is the cause,wtf you don't read these forums at all?