By the way, juiced is the same as rigged. It's a subset of rigged. Rigged means that the cards are pre-determined rather than randomized, and juiced is where the cards are pre-determined to offer everyone above-average hands and increase the betting and the rake. It's still a kind of rigging.
Almost all of the arguments against rigging apply to juicing as well, and I won't re-hash them here, but essentially it would still be illegal, would big publicly-traded profitable companies risk everything?, and wouldn't we have seen it in the data by now?
Let's see some poker tracker data that shows that a user has twice as many AA hands as 22 hands pre-flop, or that people's hole cards are pairing up on the board more than they should. Again, over a long sample set.
Here are some other statistical misconceptions that have been studied:
1) Most people think they hit a greater % of red lights than they do while driving. Why? Because they actually stop for the red lights and notice them, but whiz by the green lights. Same thing for bad beats and strange hands versus "expected outcome" hands.
2) Something like 80% of people think they're above average drivers. Not too surprised, but I bet there's a similar stat in poker. And if 80% of poker players believe themselves to be above average, then at least 30% of poker players need to find something external to blame.
Stats-related musings that begin with "I noticed..." are often misleading, because the human brain can be lousy at interpreting stats, with emotion substituting for evidence at times.