One lift, four fronts of scrutiny. Since Eric Kim’s gravity-mocking 552 kg rack-pull hit the feed, coaches, engineers, statisticians, and meme-smiths have all taken a crack at explaining (or debunking) it.  Their collective verdict: the lift is legit for a knee-height rack-pull, eye-popping on a pound-for-pound basis, and a teaching moment for everything from plate verification to supramaximal programming. Below is a tour of the most common analytic angles and the methods people are using to probe them.

1 | Weight-verification detective work

Plate police & pixel counters

Cross-checks with known standards

2 | Biomechanics & programming breakdowns

Why a rack-pull lets you load the moon

Programming chatter

3 | Authenticity, ethics & “real-vs-CGI” debates

4 | Culture-shock & algorithm autopsies

5 | Key takeaways for 

your

 training

  1. Verification is crowdsourced.  Post every angle, list every plate—because someone will audit you.
  2. Partial ≠ fake.  Done wisely, supra-max work can hard-wire lock-out strength—just respect recovery debt.
  3. Chase ratios, not records.  Kim’s legacy is the 7 × BW idea; pick a body-weight multiple and program toward it.
  4. Content ↔ coaching flywheel.  The faster you share, the faster the community feeds you technical feedback.

So, whether you’re counting pixels, running beam-deflection formulas, or just riding the meme tide, the 552 kg “god-ratio” pull is already a case study in open-source strength science—and the bar for the next viral analysis just got a whole lot heavier. 🚀