Is this a good overview to help you analyze any position?

0. WHAT WAS YOUR OPPONENTS LAST MOVE AND WHAT DID HE LEAVE BEHIND?

(SKIP 0 IF N/A)

1. WHO'S POSITION IS STATICALLY (WITHOUT A MOVE) BETTER?

A) FIRST IMPRESSION
B) MATERIAL COUNT 
C) KING SAFETY/ACTIVITY
D) PAWN STRUCTURE
E) PIECE IMBALANCES
F) WEAKNESSES
G) WHO IS BETTER WITH THE QUEENS OFF THE BOARD?
H) WHOSE POSITION IS EASIER TO PLAY?
I) EVALUATE

2. ARE ALL YOUR PIECES ADEQUATELY DEFENDED?

A) IF NOT, IT NEEDS TO BE TACTICALLY JUSTIFIED, GIVE GOOD COMPENSATION, OR BE DEFENDED

B) IS THE DEFENDING PIECE OR PAWN ATTACKED? 

C) IF THE ATTACKING PIECE IS WORTH MORE THAN YOUR PIECE AND CAN BE ATTACKED IN RETURN, THEN DEFEND YOUR PIECE WITH A PAWN AND ATTACK, IF POSSIBLE, TO KEEP/GAIN THE INITIATIVE. 

3. WHAT ARE ALL YOUR CHECKS, CAPTURES, THREATS?

A) DAUT - DON'T ANALYSE UNNECESSARY TACTICS

B) IN GENERAL, TO TAKE IS A MISTAKE

C) EVERY MOVE SHOULD MAKE A THREAT IF POSSIBLE

D) CAN YOU FORCE A CAPTURE TO OCCUR WITH CHECK WITH A SEQUENCE?

E) CAN YOU INCREASE THE PRESSURE OF THE THREAT? OR WOULD YOU HAVE TO PLAY IT NOW?

F) IF YOU NEED TO DEFEND, CAN YOU SET A TRAP FOR YOUR OPPONENT WHILE DOING SO?

G) IS THE CAPTURABLE PIECE A LONG TERM WEAKNESS THAT CAN BE CAPTURED LATER?

4. WHAT IS THE PAWN STRUCTURE TELLING YOU?

A) PAWN CHAIN DIRECTIONS
B) BACKWARD AND PASSED PAWNS
C) WEAK COLOR COMPLEXES
D) PAWN ISLANDS
E) WHAT ARE THE TYPICAL PLANS?
F) FIXED OR MOBILE?

G) DOES YOUR OPPONENT HAVE AN ISOLATED PAWN? EXCHANGE PIECES. PRIORITIZE THE EXCHANGE OF QUEENS OR EXCHANGE THE OPPOSITE COLORED BISHOP THAN THE PAWN'S SQUARE. 

H) WHAT IS THE PAWN BREAK NEEDED?

I) CAN YOU DISRUPT A PAWN TRIANGLE?

5. WHAT ARE THE PIECES TELLING YOU?

A) COORDINATION

B) MANEUVERABILITY

C) NUMBER OF PIECES ON EACH SIDE OF THE BOARD COMPARISON 

D) PASSIVE OR ACTIVE

E) DO THEY EACH HAVE A FUTURE?

F) DO THEY HAVE ESCAPE SQUARES?

G) WHAT IS THE BEST MOVE FOR EACH PIECE?

H) IS THE PIECE VULNERABLE

I) CAN YOU FORCE ANY PIECE OR PAWN TO MOVE/EXCHANGE TO WHERE IT CAUSES/RESOLVES ANY PROBLEMS WITH A-H LISTED ABOVE?

J) CAN YOU DOUBLE ROOKS OR A ROOK AND QUEEN ON AN OPEN FILE OR PENETRATE TO A RANK IN THE ENEMY POSITION?

K) CAN YOU TRAP THE ENEMY KING IN THE CENTER?

L) IS THE PIECE HINDERING OTHER PIECES?

M) WHEN CONSIDERING TACTICS, LOOK AT THE SQUARES AROUND ENEMY PIECES AND SEE IF A TACTIC WOULD WORK IF THE PIECE WAS THERE.

N) IS A TACTIC AVAILABLE FOR A KNIGHT IF IT MOVES TWICE? 

O) IS THERE A PAWN THAT IS ONE SQUARE AWAY FROM A PAWN FORK?

P) IS THE PIECE DEFENDING A THREAT AND UNABLE TO MOVE FROM THE DEFENSE OF A SQUARE?

Q) CAN A PIECE INFILTRATE OR SET UP A FUTURE INFILTRATION?

 6.WHAT IS THE POSITION TELLING YOU?

A) KEY SQUARES

B) KEY IMBALANCES

C) KEY MOTIFS 

D) KEY PIECES CONTRIBUTING TO A-C

 E) WEAKNESSES

F) WHAT IS THE MOST "DOMINANT FEATURE"?

G) HOW MUCH CONTACT IS IN THE POSITION? IF THERE IS A LOT OF CONTACT, THE POSITION IS MORE CRITICAL AND MORE CONCRETE EVALUATIONS ARE NECESSARY.

7. WHAT IS YOUR PLAN? (SHORT-TERM/LONG-TERM)

A) WHAT STAGE OF THE GAME IS IT?
B) WHO HAS THE INITIATIVE?
C) WHAT IS YOUR OPPONENT'S IDEA? DO YOU HAVE TO RESPOND TO IT?
D) WHO STRIKES FIRST?
E) WHAT ARE YOUR POSITIONS STRENGTHS AND HOW DO YOU CONVERT THEM INTO AN ADVANTAGE?
F) WHAT ARE YOUR WEAKNESSES AND HOW DO YOU LIQUIDATE OR DEFEND THEM?

G) WHAT ARE YOUR OPPONENTS WEAKNESSES AND HOW DO YOU MAKE THEM INTO LONG TERM WEAKNESSES? HOW CAN YOUR OPPONENT LIQUIDATE OR DEFEND THEM?

G) MAKE A "TO-DO-LIST" EVERY 3 MOVES OR ANYTIME THERE IS ANY IMPORTANT CHANGE TO THE POSITION.
H) DON'T TRY TO FORCE SOMETHING THAT ISN'T CONCRETE.
I) DON'T ADMIRE YOUR OWN POSITION. ONE ADVANTAGE HAS TO BE CHANGED INTO ANOTHER.

J)THE CHANCES OF OBTAINING AN ADVANTAGE ARE THE BETTER THE SMALLER IT IS. PLAY FOR AN IMPORTANT ADVANTAGE IS JUSTIFIED ONLY ON THE BASIS OF GRAVE ERRORS COMMITTED BY THE OPPONENT.

K) PRINCIPLE OF TWO WEAKNESSES. ONE WEAKNESS IS USUALLY DEFENDED SO HOW CAN YOU MAKE ANOTHER ONE?

L) INSTEAD OF JUST LOOKING AT MOVES IN SHARP POSITIONS, CALCULATE HOW MUCH TIME YOU HAVE TO RESPOND TO OR CREATE THREATS ON A PARTICULAR SQUARE, DIAGONAL, OR FILE; AND THEN LOOK FOR OPTIMAL PIECE MOVEMENT PATHS THAT MEET THE TIME.

M) WHAT ARE SOME GENERAL IDEAS THAT MAY BE APPLIED TO THE POSITION?

N) SHOULD YOU ATTACK YOUR OPPONENTS KING OR CENTER?

8. WHAT ARE 3 CANDIDATE MOVES AND THEIR FOLLOW UPS?

A) FORCING MOVES FIRST
B) FIND AN IDEA (TRY THINKING IN THEMES AND MOTIFS), PERHAPS WHILE ANALYZING A CONTINUATION, AND THEN LOOK FOR ALL THE MOVES THAT GO TOWARDS THAT IDEA. GATHER AS MANY IDEAS AS POSSIBLE AND FIND THE BEST IDEA.
C) ARE YOUR OPPONENTS PIECES ALL ADEQUATELY DEFENDED? IF NOT, LOOK FOR A TACTIC

D) WHERE IS THE PRESSURE AND HOW SHOULD YOU INFLUENCE IT?
E) WHAT SIDE SHOULD YOU PLAY ON?

SHOULD YOU PLAY WITH YOUR PAWNS OR PIECES?
F) WHAT IS YOUR LEAST ACTIVE PIECE?
G) WHAT MOVES SEEM NATURAL?

H) WHAT MOVES OPEN LINES?
I) DOES YOUR CANDIDATE MOVE MATCH THE POSITION?

J) DON'T PLAY A PASSIVE MOVE WITHOUT A DEEPER CONSIDERATION
K) WHEN YOU SEE A GOOD MOVE, LOOK FOR A BETTER ONE.
L) WHAT DOES MY CANDIDATE MOVE DO? /ENABLE? /PLAN?

M) ANALYZE CONTINUATIONS (TRY SWITCHING MOVE ORDER) AND THEN PICK.

N) WHAT DID THEIR LAST MOVE LEAVE BEHIND? 

O) WAS THE MOVE THEY PLAYED SAFE?

9. IS YOUR CHOSEN MOVE SAFE?

A) HOW MUCH OF A COMMITMENT IS IT?
B) WHAT DOES IT LEAVE BEHIND?
C) CAN YOUR OPPONENT QUICKLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT?
D) SAFETY OVER STRATEGY
E) ARE YOU MISSING SOMETHING? BOARD VISION - LOOK AT EACH PAWN AND PIECE BRIEFLY.

F) IF A KNIGHT IS SUSPECTED TO BE INVOLVED IN A LINE, TAKE SOME TIME TO VERIFY YOUR ANALYSIS. KNIGHTS ARE TRICKY.

G) WHAT ARE THE FASTEST WAYS YOUR OPPONENT CAN CHECK YOUR KING? CONSIDERING THIS WILL HELP YOU AVOID MISSING A CHECK ZWISCHENZUG LATER.

H) ANALYZE THE PRESSURE STAR OF THE PIECE YOU ARE MOVING.

10. WHO'S POSITION IS DYNAMICALLY (WITH MOVES) BETTER?

A) RE-EVALUATE THE POSITION RESULTING FROM YOUR CHOSEN MOVES CONTINUATION (SEE STEP 1).

11. MOVE!

Good advice.

I don't usually start the analysis from the end but that sounds like something I'll start doing.

I do try to paraphrase the games I analyse into a few main points:

1) Critical positions

2) Mistakes

3) Reasons for win/loss or draw

4) Interesting positions or positions that I don't understand

I'm not trying to do this every move. At this point, I've been making a list of considerations to consider in a position. These come from things I've read that resonate with me and from me thinking about what could I have changed about my thinking that would of kept me from making this mistake? 

It is amazing how much it has helped me to go back to this list and identify what from this list I could of done. If it isn't on the list then I add it. I have noticed trends by doing this and I feel like this process has sculpted my thinking process for the better and I think this addresses what you say "The essence of analysis is to find the reasons , the bad thinking process, that lead the bad moves. If you don't do that , it's pointless.". Thoughts on this?

Yes, I'm still trying to figure out the best way to organize that. I do it to an extent but it isn't organized. I've also been being lazy because I think that the chessbase software I have is capable of doing the tagging and grouping of games in an organized fashion but I haven't confirmed it. 

I've been learning and retaining so much stuff lately that I haven't really prioritized this particular thing.

I think most strong players begin by examining the tactical situation.  After the opponent's last move, what checks captures and threats does your opponent have? And what checks, captures, and threats do you have. Tactics first, because all the knight outposts and better pawn structure in the world won't help if you are about to lose a rook to a two-move tactic. 

I like your overview and Deirdreskye's feedback on it    Very helpful.  

As they say "Tactics flow from a superior position."

GMs know when tactics in a position are likely. They also know what ideas should work and what ideas shouldn't. 

When I watch a GM stream and play other GM's, they might at first sight wonder if their opponents move allows a tactic but it usually ends with the saying "Oh, they have Ng4 at the end." for example and the Ng4 move is 5 moves into the variation. They do this very quickly too; in a matter of seconds. I never see them analyze the tactical situation unless the position calls for it. A positional style GM knows when to switch to the tactician hat and visa versa. They simply have a better understanding of the position. Even in blitz they have astounding accuracy in seemingly complex positions (at least the super GMs). It is amazing to me.

I agree on the fact that you should understand why you lost. When you know the reason behind your lose, you can start fixing the problem[s] that lead to it.

FM @chuddog wrote a good article that mentions how to think of a move:

https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-think-in-chess

"Do not abandon fundamental principles, but look for a move that's based on a good idea and leads to a specific follow-up in order to achieve a specific goal in the given position (rather than making a move only to fulfill an idea). For example, instead of thinking "I will play Re1 because a rook belongs on an open file," you would approach it as, "Re1, putting the rook on an open file, will enable (moves X, Y, Z) in order to (start a kingside attack / win a pawn / etc.)."

Maybe it can be summarized by asking these 3 questions when considering a move:

My candidate move does this...

My candidate move enables this...

My candidate move helps the plan of this...

I thought Chuddog's article was a good one and reinforces what I have been working on since about April when I got back into chess. My style was way too intuitive and based on feel good principles instead of calculation.

On the other hand, knowing about types of weaknesses and such helps with the calculation. When doing things like tactics, I now try to understand the position and find likely targets instead of just trying all the possible captures, checks, etc. That helps in a real game even when tactics are not present.

I think the list by the OP is too much for playing. It may be useful for analysing games as a prompt if you are lost for how to approach a position. I go by something like: 1. Identify any threat to my material or position 2. What is the strategy. Of course this has to take into account a threat if there is one. 3. Identify tactical resources. this is a whole big section in itself that can be subdivided into many areas. Eg. starting with checks, captures, threats (forcing moves) 4. Choose up to 3 candidate moves that achieve the strategy 5. Calculate those in more depth. 6.Select one move. Double check it.

@madratter7

Yes, i've noticed my thinking shift that way as well. I've tried to include most of the things i like in the list above. I might still be missing a lot though. I still need to get around to going over the GM Soltis books on how to pick a move and thought process. I had to move to a new location and have been getting settled in. I bet there are a lot of good things in those books that will make the list.

Yes, it is a reference for analyzing and an attempt at trying to critique my thought process. This list would not be good for a game. Someone gave me some good advice about an in-game thought process needs to be "more organic" like the one you gave. Mine would be something like this:

1.What did my opponents last move do? Do I have to respond to it?

2. Look at all forcing moves and analyze them first

3. What is the status of the center? If it is locked then I look at improving my position. If it is fluid then I look at assessing the position further and trying to find a move that I have time for and goes with my plan.

4. What is my plan? If I can't find a good plan I look to develop my least active piece or get rid of my opponents most active piece.

5. What are my candidate moves? What does the move do, enable, and help with the plan?

6. Is my move safe? 

Or something like that. It changes depending on the position it seems. I am trying to rely more on calculation as it seems to be the most important thing as I watch GMs stream. They are always calculating it seems. They also know what part of the board they should play on and prune bad moves that i will calculate automatically. I notice I focus on the wrong moves a lot and go down a rabbit hole a lot. My biggest weakness right now is making unnecessary commitments with my moves. I get to thinking that a move is too passive when really it would be better than what I end up playing.

It's easy to make unnecessary commitments. The adage that Chess is 99% tactics can be misleading. I revised my strategy to solidify and secure my position and close down any counterplay if I'm up on material. Since I found winning material can cause pieces to be misplaced or uncoordinated. Generally a capture doesn't improve your position. After that it is the strategy of "winning a won game".

Very good point. I don't know if you've read The Attacking Manual Vol 1 or not but this idea is expressed as Evolution, Revolution, Evolution. 

You build up, strike, and then build up and strike again. This idea is what stopped me from premature attacks and helped me improve a lot. 

What also would help is to look for the easiest path to the win. I usually over commit when I'm winning and give my opponent counterplay. I'm okay with this in a sense because I try to play for accuracy rather than win/lose.  I'm more interested in learning at the moment than rating points. I don't think I'm good enough to really care about rating points. If I thought I could get to a 2000 or so level then I might care but I'm nowhere near that yet.

i am bored

okay

you got the point

i am

Aren't we all bored just a little bit at least?

I put move as the final step to complete it. That is the final step in any given position unless checkmate, stalemate, etc... has occurred so it seems logical that it should be included to me. I hope that explains it somewhat. It is confusing at best but to me it feels necessary for completion.

This all started from the book “Good Move Guide” (if I recall correctly) which has a chapter on “Find the plan”. My original goal was to construct a list that would potentially help me think about the position more accurately and it evolved from there. I would say it has helped me in the sense that this is kind of a list written by my mistakes or what i think is good advice that i have read or heard.

I also use this list to establish patterns for weaknesses by relating them to one of the steps when I analyze my games. I then reacquaint myself with that step as kind of a refresher. I don’t know if any of that makes sense but it seems to work for me. I even just added a new thing to the list that might help me in the future. 

Steps 1 and 10 are by far the hardest for me to get right. I would think that is common but I’m not sure how to correct that other than with experience and pattern recognition perhaps