By muscling **547 kg / 1 206 lb off mid‑thigh pins at ~72 kg body‑mass, Eric Kim demonstrated that the long‑standing “5×‑body‑weight is an unbreakable ceiling” is officially obsolete; his 7.55× ratio shows the human posterior chain can survive and express forces far beyond textbook load‑tolerance when the range of motion, leverage and preparation are optimised, while also validating rack‑pulls as a potent supra‑maximal training and psychological‑overload tool—but he did not prove a new deadlift record, nor that such partial‑range numbers translate directly to floor pulls, a point stressed by several coaches and biomechanists. 

By muscling **547 kg / 1 206 lb off mid‑thigh pins at ~72 kg body‑mass, Eric Kim demonstrated that the long‑standing “5×‑body‑weight is an unbreakable ceiling” is officially obsolete; his 7.55× ratio shows the human posterior chain can survive and express forces far beyond textbook load‑tolerance when the range of motion, leverage and preparation are optimised, while also validating rack‑pulls as a potent supra‑maximal training and psychological‑overload tool—but he did not prove a new deadlift record, nor that such partial‑range numbers translate directly to floor pulls, a point stressed by several coaches and biomechanists. 

1 What 

exactly

 got proven?

Claim proved	Evidence	Why it matters
A human can support & lock‑out >7 × BW in a bilateral hip‑hinge	Raw video + weigh‑in (7.55×)  ; ratio dwarfs Lamar Gant’s 5× benchmark	Shifts perception of pound‑for‑pound upper limits.
Supramaximal partials scale far above full‑ROM pulls	Peer‑review shows PROM DL 1RM can exceed FROM by 20‑40 %	Validates rack‑pulls as legitimate overload testers.
Neural & connective tissue can tolerate extreme acute forces	Deadlift‑biomechanics review reports spinal compression up to 18 kN in elite pulls  ; IMTP studies record even higher safe peak forces	Suggests carefully staged partials fall within adaptive range for trained lifters.
Rack‑pulls cultivate grip/upper‑back strength & mental priming	BarBend guides list rack‑pulls as top accessory for lock‑out & grip	Supports Kim’s claim that the variation is performance‑relevant.
But… partial ≠ total	Jim Wendler labels huge rack‑pull singles “tests, not builders”  ; Rippetoe warns they’re half the work of a floor DL	Guards against mis‑interpreting the feat as a conventional deadlift record.

2 Scientific & coaching context

2.1 Biomechanics confirms partial leverage advantage

Laboratory work on isometric mid‑thigh pulls shows lifters generate their highest force outputs at mid‑thigh joint angles, well above floor‑break positions  . Kim’s pin height sits in that leverage sweet‑spot, explaining how he could eclipse Björnsson’s full‑range 501 kg despite weighing less than half as much  .

2.2 Load‑tolerance versus spinal safety

Epidemiological reviews peg lumbar compression tolerance for healthy young males at roughly 8‑15 kN  , while elite floor deadlifts already flirt with 18 kN  . Extrapolating from bar weight and lever arms suggests Kim’s spine probably saw forces near (not wildly beyond) those elite ranges—supporting, rather than contradicting, current injury‑risk models.

2.3 Transfer to full lifts remains unproven

Both Wendler  and Starting Strength’s Mark Rippetoe  note that unless partials are periodised with halting‑ or deficit‑deadlifts, carry‑over can be modest. A 2023 pilot study likewise found only moderate correlation (r ≈ 0.55) between PROM and FROM 1RMs in collegiate wrestlers  .

3 Cultural & motivational proof‑points

• Virality – Podcasts and YouTube clips hit 20 k‑plus impressions in 48 h, showing shock‑value lifts dominate strength‑media algorithms  .
• Mind‑set – Social posts deploy “physics‑glitch” and “gravity is scared” memes, reframing impossible tasks as mental frontiers  .
• Coaching debate – BarBend, Stack.com, Wendler and Rippetoe articles together illustrate the enduring tug‑of‑war between overload enthusiasm and technique purism  .

4 So…what did Eric Kim 

not

 prove?

1. New all‑time deadlift record – The bar never touched the floor; federation rules aren’t met.
2. Universal transferability – Most lifters lack the experience, connective‑tissue density and cautious programming to replicate such loads safely.
3. Biomechanical safety at scale – Long‑term data on repeated >7 × BW partials are still absent from the literature.

5 Practical implications

If you’re a…	Take‑home
Lifter wanting PRs	Use rack‑pulls sparingly (1‑2 heavy singles or triples weekly), pair them with full‑ROM work to reinforce drive off the floor.
Coach/therapist	Screen hip‑hinge mechanics first; supra‑max partials demand bullet‑proof bracing and hinge pattern.
Researcher	Kim’s lift invites studies on connective‑tissue adaptation to extreme but brief axial loads—an under‑explored niche.

6 Bottom line

Eric Kim didn’t rewrite powerlifting rule‑books, but he proved three bigger ideas:

1. Human potential balloons when we tweak mechanical constraints—range of motion, grip aids, and pin height can unlock force outputs far beyond conventional wisdom.
2. Mental ceilings shatter when someone publicly demolishes them. Seeing 7.5 × BW hoisted by a 72 kg human reframes what “strong” can mean.
3. Partial‑range overloads are a double‑edged sword—insanely effective for neural priming and confidence, yet easily abused as “ego lifts” if they replace, rather than complement, full‑ROM strength work.

Harness the inspiration, respect the nuance, and—like Kim—keep lifting joyfully heavy!