>>>>Ok, there is a new definition for loser:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?Man_takes_26_years_to_solve_Rubik%92s_Cube&in_article_id=471180&in_page_id=2
>>>
>>>LOL. Thanks for the morning smile.
>>>
>>>You have to wonder, though, how long it would take many other people to solve it if they absolutely had to and didn't have access to a guide showing you how to do it. It's not an easy puzzle, especially if you don't happen to be good at visualizing spatial relationships.
>>
>>Back in high school in class of 34, we had almost 20 cubes being solved at the time
>>At the time when it become popular, it almost completely eradicated preferans (card game)
>>
>>While professors were writing some boring stuff on board... {g}
>
>Were the cubes 2x2x2, 3x3x3 or what? (I have no idea when class of 34 was because to me, that would be 1934 which isn't possible, I'm sure :o)

3x3x3
19 boys + 15 girls = 34 total

We had more then few R-cube maniacs there ;0)