Abstract
In antiquity, professional athletes were unable to cover the expenses for nutrition, training and travelling to participate competitions, unless they belonged to a wealthy family. In order to cover these expenses, they had to borrow money by concluding loan contracts. In Roman law, loan contracts with professional athletes had different features compared to ordinary loan contracts. First of all, a professional athlete did not have to pay the loan he received, unless he won victories and awards from the competitions he participated in. Another point where loan contracts with professional athletes differed from the ordinary loans is interest. In order to be able to claim interest on an ordinary loan agreement, it was necessary to extract a promise from the borrower in the form of a separate verbal contract (stipulatio), besides the ordinary loan contract. On the other hand, regarding the loan contracts with professional athletes, there was no need to conclude a stipulatio in order to demand interest, rather it was sufficient to conclude a formless pactum (agreement). Loan contracts with athletes resemble maritime loans in these aspects.