Employment Contract

I accepted a new job in Virginia as a physician in a medical practice one year ago. The terms of my contract as I understood them were that I would be eligible for partnership (meaning full financial partnership) within 3 years. The contract stipulates that "physician will be eligible for partnership at the good faith discretion of the board no later than 3 years from the effective date of the contract. Physician will be allowed to purchase an equal number of shares as then current partners for $1000.00....."

Recently I was made aware that there is and was at the time I signed my contract a policy which states that I could only be reviewed for 50% partnership at 3 years then 75% partnership 6 months later and then 100% partnership at 4 years no matter what my level of performance is.

Is this a breach of contract? Was there a fraud in not making me aware of the policy before I signed? What is my legal recourse at this point?

Based solely on the information provided in your post, it appears to me that there is no breach.
You assumed that the "eligible for partnership at the good faith discretion" meant FULL partnership. It could soundly be argued by them that the contractual partnership offered is the "50% partnership at 3 years" with supplemental increases in percentage over time.

Unfortunately, as soon as we remove our gloves (latex) we are as stupid as anyone else. As one who is accustomed to never assuming nor presuming you certainly should have known better than to have signed without having such an important contract reviewed by an attorney and all of it's terms and conditions fully explained to you.He would also have explored any extant policies in effect. A buy-in as full partner after only 3 years is "too good-to-be-true".Chalk this up to another part of your expensive education.
Another small caveat: pay for the best legal and financial advice.

The contract does stipulate that I would own the same number of shares as then existing patners...I'm not so sure that it could be interpreted to mean 50% and the progressively increasing partnership with that in the contract! There is also the issue of misunderstanding in that if the author of the contract knew or should have known I would interperet the contract as I did, he should have informed me or made his intention clear.

It does not say "when" you would be able to acquire the same number of shares as the current partners. So the argument for acquisition on a percentage basis is logical. It does say "eligible" and that is not a guarantee for partnership at all.