Roy Shaw

Hi Dave,

I just finished the book Roy "Pretty Boy" Shaw and remembered and older seminar report I read somewhere else and your name was also mentioned.

Where you present when he talked about his old training regime (I think mainly push-ups, sit-ups and squats etc.) and when his showed his techniques?

Could you write a little about that?

Thanks a lot,
Julian

Yes Alan Charlton organised a seminar in Enfield a few years back.. Roy was main guest along with me...

I THINK he paid me a couple of compliments (Jamie O'Keefe spent all day with him)...

First Roy asked to go on first not in the middle as was planned as he said he couldnt stay long .. then he stopped all day to the very end .. He came up to me at the end and said (imagine a pure cockney accent here)

Ya Know mate .. yer a vicious little Fecker aintchya

Which I took to be a compliment...

He talked a lot about Lenny McClean and some other fights he had .. he admitted murdering an inmate in Parkhurst, and how he loved to wind up the screws for a good punch up....
He had the wildest eyes I have ever seen..

He said he mainly did lots of roadwork.. lots of pushups and weights and plenty of heavy bag work.. nothing special.. it was just his determination .. he did it every day never missed.. took lots of vitamins and minerals as well...

I didnt get the impression he had any special methods just never missed and pushed hard.. he looked bloody good for his age and when he demonstrated his right cross and right an dleft hooks I thought ,, some power there

nice chap but a bits scary

Great information! Thanks for the fast reply.

Found a picture of Roy with Kevin O'Hagan

I have a smiliar picture.. it was taken on the day I described... Kev came on the course... I taught Kev for while a few years back

you can see how well Shaw looked at 60plus

David Turton wrote:


He had the wildest eyes I have ever seen..

Looking at that photo i have to agree with you there Dave.

David Turton wrote:

He said he mainly did lots of roadwork.. lots of pushups and weights and plenty of heavy bag work.. nothing special.. it was just his determination .. he did it every day never missed.. took lots of vitamins and minerals as well...

I didnt get the impression he had any special methods just never missed and pushed hard.. he looked bloody good for his age and when he demonstrated his right cross and right an dleft hooks I thought ,, some power there

nice chap but a bits scary

That's really very interesting.
Nothing too fancy, not too many tecniques but what he does have is that he drills them every day, plus his mental attitude of course. I'm guessing, as I've also read his book that after what he's experienced and been through his mental determination and ferocity must be quite something else.
I daresay there's quite a few very handy guys who don't have a yard long list of tecniques but what they do have they make work very well for themselves.
Just an observation after reading your thoughts on Roy Shaw.

Exactly he had the often heard VIOLENT INTENT. As one of the prison doctors wrote: "Roy Shaw is the most powerful and dangerous man I have ever met"... Given the fact he could knock his cell door open if he was angry...

you could read it in his eyes up close.. and when he was talking about some old enemies his face hardened like stone and his eyes went even scarier..

afterwards Jamie O'Keefe asked me what would I do against Roy if it ever came to it

I said the only way to beat Roy other than a snipers rifle would be on the floor.. choke him out perhaps.. Shaw himself admitted to me he couldnt wrestle.. the one major flaw in that pretend tactic is that you simply would HAVE to kill him.. he would have come after you if you didnt

Hm, I think in his book he speaks about one time he was choked out in Broadmoor by the male nurses. But like you said Dave what are you doing when he wakes up again... maybe run.

Here is a seminar report of that particular day with Roy Shaw.

http://www.spa.ukf.net/spasem5.htm

Hero worsphip for convicted criminals confuses me so much!

Pay to see a guy at a seminar who hurt and damaged so many peoples lives! why?


I had the chance to meet Mike Tyson last year, at an organised 'meet Mike Tyson' event.

I told the guy who asked me along, that why would I want to meet and shake someone's hand who has committed one of the worst crimes possible??

I can appreciate your comments .. but often the best way to understand BOTH sides of any subject is to have some contact with both sides...

for example when we were devising our anti-mugging and anti-gang attacks stuff, as well as interviewing victims, we obtained permission to interview some youngsters serving time for these crimes .. their insight ito how and why they picked certain 'victims' etc was interesting and useful.

Likewise with Roy Shaw .. is insight into 'sudden' violence, how to intimidate and instill fear into people was also both interesting and useful..

its not correct to hero-worship or idolise certain people, but often poachers make the best gamekeepers

David Turton wrote:I can appreciate your comments .. but often the best way to understand BOTH sides of any subject is to have some contact with both sides...

for example when we were devising our anti-mugging and anti-gang attacks stuff, as well as interviewing victims, we obtained permission to interview some youngsters serving time for these crimes .. their insight ito how and why they picked certain 'victims' etc was interesting and useful.

Likewise with Roy Shaw .. is insight into 'sudden' violence, how to intimidate and instill fear into people was also both interesting and useful..

its not correct to hero-worship or idolise certain people, but often poachers make the best gamekeepers

so Roy has a wealth of RBSD knowledge then? or just smashing kids up?

a tad harsh that mate .. Roy wasnt known for just "Smashing kids up".. I dont actually ever recall hearing him doing that.

I dont "hero worhship" a violent criminal, but I cant pretend not to admire his training and condition and his bravery in facing anyone at all who challenged him.. I dont admire his criminality.

however he was a former pro boxer with a fair record.
He has done the doors in some very rough London venues, been a bodyguard/minder .. had dozens of unlicenced boxing matches, met challenges on the cobbles in square goes, been attacked by gangs armed with a variety of weapons, been jumped on when out having a meal with his girlfriends etc etc.

so YES I do believe he has a knowledge of RBSD in a different manner than most martial artists would perhaps acknoledge to.

being attacked when out shopping by several armed attackers and surviving these encounters requires a degree of self-defence knowledge and ability

one could argue his lifestyle was responsible for him being attacked by overwhelming numbers as a revenge thing..fine I got no argument with that

but he still had to deal with these violent attacks and he did,, that showed his mental and physical strengths in my view.

Hitler was one of the worst meglamaniacs in history, buthe knew out to control crowds with just his oratory skills.. this didnt make him someone most people could admire.. but how could a short ugly little austrian house painter and former corporal with no social skills or great education end up as ruler of half the world, and for a while a Hero to his own people if he didnt know how to project his personality to vast crowds....
I admire that ability but hated everything else about Hitler

Roy Shaw as a criminal deserved all he got and was not a nice man.. however when I met him he was friendly and polite, and certainly knew how to use mental and physical strengths in combat situations

Booth of the Salvation Army was note for stating "Why should the Devil have all the best songs"

It makes perfect logical sense to learn about the reality of violence from someone like Roy Shaw. Academics researching the areas of psychology, criminology, sociology, philosophy and medicine have been doing it for thousands of years! Why, because one of the best sources is experience.

Morality has absolutely NO bearing on the value of information.

Listening to Roy Shaw explain the techniques and concepts behind his success is no more morally ambiguous than listening to Royce Gracie talk about his success as a fighter in and out of the cage. To claim otherwise is ridiculous.

In fact, if we want to place a moral judgement on the value the Gracies were probably worse when it came to promoting and inviting violence. For Shaw violence was a byproduct of his profession as a criminal. For the Gracies violence was a cynically manipulated marketing tool. At least Shaw was "honest", and didn't dress his activities up in ridiculous rhetoric about "honour" and "respect" and "defending the family name"

There's not much moral high ground to claim for ANYONE who makes money from smashing another person into unconsciousness. What fighters MAY have is honesty and integrity about their actions. That's about the most you can hope for.

If you're looking for moral guidance from ANYONE who's main skill in life is hurting other human beings then I would suggest that's more of an issue than anything else.

If you're looking for moral guidance from ANYONE who's main skill in life is hurting other human beings then I would suggest that's more of an issue than anything else.

Chris, surely that depends on their intent doesn't it? I for example would question the morals of an arsonist...but a fireman will also deliberately light fires.

Same thing with soldiers and terrorists n'est-ce pas? The soldier has the same skill set (more or less) but he's doing it do defend his country unlike his evil counterpart.

Nick

Nick,

The point really is that morality is a separate issue from the learning experience. Knowledge and information is either of value or it isn't.

How an individual uses that experience, knowledge and skill will either be viewed as moral or immoral but that's not what is being argued here.

BD seems to think that because someone has done something he considers immoral in the past then reading or listening to that person is somehow wrong and or the information they hold is valueless because of the moral nature of their previous actions. I argue categorically that he is incorrect and that failure to learn from the actions of those people we consider immoral is a failure in logical thinking.

I would go so far as to say that every great fighter I have ever read about, seen in action or met had an element to their nature which would be considered "wrong" by the majority of society in the developed world. That includes the "good guys" as well as the "bad" That makes no difference at all to the quality of the information they share, just means that I probably wouldn't want them marrying my sister.

I also think that if you are looking that far afield for a bearing on your moral compass then you've missed out on some personal development somewhere. I have a strong enough moral base to not have to worry that a conversation or a training session with someone like Roy Shaw is going to corrupt me. If there are people who don't then that's a bigger problem than Roy Shaw doing a few seminars.

I would tend to agree that people who make thier living with violence, in whatever format, probably don't tend to be especially nice people. Admittedly that is a big generalisation. Although, I can think of well known martial artist on have posted here, who would fit the catagory of "good fighter/crap personality."

I can sympathize with BD's point of view in that he seems to be saying that the likes of Roy Shaw don't deserve to have the attention of others. In would concur if this is BD's underlying point. I loath the way the British media, and seemingly the British public, lionise gangsters, gang members, and other undesireables. Take the "Deadliest Men" programme, mentioned on another forum here. It's a programme which puts unsavoury characters in the spotlight (not always, there have been some law-abiding people featured as well).

As to whether we can learn from such characters; I think it's all down to how well they are able to articulate their experiences Not to mention how honest they are willing to be. Roy Shaw has never struck me as being either especially articulate, or especially intelligent.

It is true that many "respectable" martial artists are not really any better in the morality department. The Gracies have used violence simply to make money. The veneer of "honour" that a lot of people use to sanitise their activities, is usually just that. A superficial veneer. At least the Gracie family has mostly stayed within the law, unlike the likes of Shaw et al.

Chris,

Would you mind expanding a bit on your commenr about all the good fighters you know ect having something "wrong" about them? I think it's a very interesting point.

Chris...I agree with you about learning from anyone who has something to teach and I also agree with BN about if they're going to be any good at it they have to be intelligent and capable of passing on their lessons.

I just didn't agree with the bit about everyone who's a bit tasty is automatically morally corrupt in some way...why can't I for example marry your sister? (assuming she's drop dead gorgeous, rich and available - and if she owns a Porsche dealership I'll be over tomorrow )

Nick

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGooZaCo5RM&feature=related

Very impressive condition for his age.

And somehow I wouldn't fancy many cage fighters chances against him!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGooZaCo5RM&feature=related

In all fairness to Roy he has been in the ring and done the business so I can't see how he is any different to other more "respectable" fighters.I am sure people can learn something from him,perhaps more in the way of training and staying in shape than self protection.Guys like him don't practice self protection,they just kick the shit out of anyone who is foolish enough to cross their path.

Putrid wrote:
And somehow I wouldn't fancy many cage fighters chances against him!

.

In a boxing format?

I think many top tier MMA athletes would easily out box him today, or if he was still in his prime.


In a MMA format?

I'd give him just over a minute before he got G n P'd or choked out

In a street fight?

see answer for MMA format

The reference was to "many" cage fighters, not every cage fighter..

What he clearly doesn't lack is the ferocity and intensity mindset- something that IMHO is lacking in 'many' cage fighters - adding this to his 'limited' fighting skill base I reckon he'd hold his own quite comfortably with 'many' cage fighters.