On yesterday's Mad Money, Jim Cramer offered his "Mad Money Manual" -- a guide to how to watch the show inspired by the criticism of his stock-picking track record leveled by the press.

The show is actually a recap of an episode from May, but I missed that one so I'll opine on it now. According to TheStreet.com's recap of the show:

In a given week Cramer said he might recommend a dozen stocks, excluding the ones in the "Lightning Round." But just because Cramer says he likes a stock, doesn't mean that viewers should go out and buy it.

Nor does it mean that if people buy that stock they will absolutely, positively make lots of money, Cramer said. "That's not how this game works."

Cramer stresses the importance of doing your own homework, but here's the problem with that advice: Can the Average Joe with a 10-inch TV and Yahoo! Finance really expect to uncover something that hedge fund legend Jim Cramer has missed?

Maybe, and here's why: From what I've seen, Jim Cramer generally recommends stocks from a very broad top-down approach, based on anecdotal trends that he's observed. He has generally not done in-depth research (No one can do in-depth research for 12 tips a day) but this brings us to another problem with the show: Is Jim Cramer giving stock picks on companies he knows almost nothing about? I think that he often is. And that's OK -- if he's using them as examples of broader trends -- but it's misleading when he pounds the "Buy, Buy, Buy" button and then says that that doesn't really mean you should buy it after Barron's questions his track record.

I like Mad Money. It isn't about creating alpha -- it's about getting a look inside the mind of a brilliant man who happens to know a lot about the stock market and is also a lot more entertaining than say, Louis Rukeyser was. But when you say "Watch TV, Get rich" you have to expect complaints when your stock tips underperform.