目前的兴奋剂案件中,间接证据的价值被低估或完全否定。过度依赖直接证据的趋势有着不利于兴奋剂违纪的惩处、使裁决的公正性被质疑、给案件侦查以不良导向等不良影响。错案数据分析指出,间接证据通常比直接证据更可靠,应充分发挥间接证据的印证功能、补证功能以及独立定案功能。在近年来的兴奋剂案件中,也有一些完全用间接证据证明兴奋剂违纪的先例,运用身体参数变动推定法、排除法、整体合力推导法3种方法。建议在今后的兴奋剂案件中增强间接证据的印证功能和补证功能、加强间接证据单独定案功能的运用、重视间接证据证明结构的法律化。在我国应加快体育仲裁程序的设立、注重对证据补强规则的应用、正确认识兴奋剂案件的证明标准。 In the current doping cases, the value of indirect evidence is underestimated or totally rejected. The tendency of over-reliance on direct evidence has a negative impact on discipline and punishment of doping, making the fairness of the award challenged, adversely affecting the investigation of the case in an adverse direction. Misdirected data analysis points out that indirect evidence is usually more reliable than direct evidence and should give full scope to the proof function, supplementary card function and independent verification function of indirect evidence. Among the stimulant cases in recent years, there are also some precedents that are completely proved by indirect evidence to violate doping discipline. Three methods are used to estimate the variation of body parameters, eliminate the law, and derive the total joint force. It is suggested to strengthen the proof function and supplementary certification function of indirect evidence in future stimulant cases, strengthen the application of the indirect confirmation function of the separate evidence, and attach importance to the indirect evidence to prove the legalization of the structure. In our country, we should speed up the establishment of the sports arbitration procedure, pay attention to the application of the rules of evidence reinforcement, and correctly understand the standards of proving the cases of doping.