While it is true that eventually, the patterns would be recognized and we'd have the same problem, I think the gambit (to use a chess term) Kramnik is making he

While it is true that eventually, the patterns would be recognized and we'd have the same problem, I think the gambit (to use a chess term) Kramnik is making here is that for the current form of chess, it took us hundreds of years of practice, experience, and study to get to this point. Before we reached this stage, chess was, as Kramnik is arguing, more exciting and entertaining. This time around the adjustment period would no doubt be significantly shorter for a couple of reasons: 1) Computer-aided analysis will greatly accelerate the evaluation of new openings and positions 2) This change does not really affect end-game theory, so that part doesn't change