Honestly, why don't you post every single "Bad Beat" you see and then post every hand that you think plays out "Standard". While you are at it throw in anything you think seemed interesting at the time. Even if it just involves you raising AA preflop and winning without showdown. Then you can do some true mathematical analysis and see if it is all true. I think you will quickly find out that over the course of 1000's of hands you will see that everything begins to fall in line and is quite normal.

Also, it is really interesting that you only hear these theories when people are losing. Why are people unable to deduce theories of rigged sites when the person is winning? It's a simple bias in the way the mind perceives good vs bad emotions.

Also, the idea that bad beats do not occur as often live is interesting. You would think the deck is randomly shuffled and should spit out an appropriate number of bad beats as is dictated by probability. Again I would strongly argue that if you compared 1000's of live hands vs 1000's of online hands on a 1:1 ratio you would start to see them converge and create similar amounts of "Bad Beats" "Good Runs" "Bad Runs" etc. If for some reason you are truly seeing less bad beats live than the probability would dictate maybe that would mean that live poker is rigged to not deal so many bad beats. You never really know until you collect the data and run the numbers. Personally I have played over 5 Million hands of online poker and can tell you with a a high level of certainty that it is in fact not rigged in any way that I can discern.