1. The difference in those numbers is negligible
2. Number 5 and 6 batsmen usually aren't as good as those batting in the top 4.
Forget the stats, watch or play some cricket. The vast majority of the time, the openers have a harder job against the pick of the opposition bowlers, at their freshest, with a shiny, hard new ball at their disposal.
What's the argument for it being harder to bat down the order anyway?
Answer to 1:- Yes, that's what I have been saying from the last few posts; the difference is neglegible.
Answer to 2:- Number 5 and 6 batsmen are generally worse than number 3 or 4 batsmen most of the times...But not necessarily worse than the openers...
First of all, if you know what you're replying to then you would know I never claimed batting down the order is harder than batting as openers...What I said was opening isn't harder than batting down the order...
If you don't believe in stats, Sanz has already provided most of the arguments...I will only add some points to that. If opening batsmen take some time to set their eyes against the new ball, opening bowlers also take some time to be in correct rhythm and pace...Also, it's easier to score quickly off the shining ball...
And it depends on personal preferences...If you ask Gavaskar in which position he'll love batting most he'll tell you opening. If you ask V. Richards, he'll tell you at 3 or 4 (or, maybe 5)...
By the way, yes I watch and play cricket and personally I love to open the batting more than playing in the middle-order...Again, that's because of my personal choice, not because opening is easier or something...