In a season-long NFL betting experiment, a human bettor went 3-2 and gained 0.99 units in Week 1 while ChatGPT went 0-5 and lost 5.23 units. The human’s winning picks were Chicago Bears -3 (-106), Washington Commanders +5½ (-106), and Las Vegas Raiders-Miami Dolphins Under 41 (-110); his losing picks were Jacksonville Jaguars-Cleveland Browns Under 40½ (-110) and Green Bay Packers Moneyline (+110). ChatGPT’s losing picks were Houston Texans +1½ (-108), Tampa Bay Buccaneers-Cincinnati Bengals Under 50½ (-108), Detroit Lions -7 (-106), Los Angeles Chargers -9 (-110), and Green Bay Packers Moneyline (+110). The rules remain the same: ChatGPT and the human each make five best bets using the same set of odds, no selection can be priced worse than -120, and every wager is sized to win one unit, meaning a -110 favorite risks 1.10 units to win one, while a +110 underdog risks approximately 0.91 units to win one. The human noted one week is far too small a sample to draw sweeping conclusions, then concluded humanity is safe, at least for now.