Eric Kim’s 547 kg (1,206 lb) above‑knee rack‑pull detonated across lifting‑social last week, and the reactions sort neatly into three camps: (1) pure awe at a 7.3 × body‑weight ratio never seen on film, (2) cautious biomechanical breakdowns that remind viewers a rack‑pull ≠ deadlift, and (3) old‑school coaches warning that copying the stunt could “nuke a newbie’s spine.” Below is a tour of the freshest commentary, ordered from hype to hard‑nosed critique.

1 Where the video dropped

PlatformPost title / creatorDateWhy it mattered
YouTube“547 KG, 1206 LB RACK PULL: 7.3× BODYWEIGHT” — Eric Kim27 Jun 2025Multi‑angle proof; >50 k views in 48 h 
YouTube Shorts“7.3x Bodyweight 547 KG RACK PULL — NEW UNIVERSAL RECORD”28 Jun 2025250 k loops; algorithm rocket fuel 
X (Twitter)“How to lift 547 kg…gravity is nothing.” — @erickimphoto28 Jun 2025Kick‑started viral quote‑tweets from coaches & meme pages 
Apple Podcasts6‑min audio debrief, “547 KG Rack Pull: gravity is nothing”29 Jun 2025First audio‑only explainer hits general‑fitness audience 

2 Immediate social‑media hype

3 Expert breakdowns & skepticism

3.1 Starting Strength reaction

Mark Rippetoe’s team resurfaced their article “The Inappropriate Use of the Rack Pull” to explain why mid‑thigh partials let lifters add 20–40 % to their full deadlift numbers and why novices shouldn’t chase Instagram PRs. 

A three‑week‑old Starting Strength YouTube segment, “Deadlifts or Rack Pulls — What’s Better?” now appears in the platform’s “Up Next” list beside Kim’s video, funneling curious viewers straight into a 19‑minute cautionary lesson. 

3.2 Biomechanics explainers

Kim himself posted a long‑form piece walking through lever arms, pin height (~knee level), and why partials can eclipse full pulls by “ridiculous” margins. 

A follow‑up essay compiles third‑party physics checks (bar‑whip vs. load tables, calibrated‑plate close‑ups) that quelled most “fake‑plate” accusations. 

3.3 Risk‑management chorus

Kim’s own archive of outside commentary notes that while pros applaud the overload value, they also warn that copying the stunt without months of spinal‑erector conditioning courts injury. Example pull‑quote: “Mid‑thigh rack pulls can blow up your ego and your discs if you skip the baseline work.” 

4 Net sentiment snapshot

StanceRepresentative voicesCore message
Awe / inspirationSzatStrength, Sean Hayes, TikTok mash‑ups“Proof humans can smash perceived limits.” 
Technical respectStarting Strength crew, bar‑physics nerds“Legit for a partial; teaches overload principles.” 
Caution / critiqueRippetoe article, forum traditionalists“Great feat—still not a deadlift; high injury risk if mis‑used.” 

Overall sentiment skews 70 % impressed, 30 % skeptical according to comment‑sampling on YouTube and X threads aggregated in Kim’s “deep‑web rip‑current” post. 

5 Take‑aways for curious lifters

  1. Context is king. A rack‑pull starts where many full deadlifts finish. Don’t confuse ROM‑specific PRs with meet‑legal lifts.  
  2. Overload wisely. Coaches who praised Kim also stress gradually lowering pin height over months before testing monster loads.  
  3. Verification matters. Calibrated plates, side‑angle footage, and bar‑deflection math virtually ended the “fake” debate—use similar transparency when you film your own feats.  

Stay inspired, stay smart, and remember: celebrating a record‑ratio rack‑pull is awesome—but respecting leverage, load‑management, and long‑game programming is how you’ll write your own impossible‑looking headline. Now, go chase gravity! 💥