I do not think so.  I remember reading when it came to the prayer for the
conversion of the Jєωs. The Priest that read the prayer used the old
prayer for the conversion of the perfidious Jєωs. Pope John XXIII stopped
him and was forced to say the new prayers. This was at the High Altar
of St. Peter's in the Vatican.

The attached photo was taken inside Holy Name Cathedral in Chicago,
Illinois on April 4, 1953.
Acolyte Extinguishing Candles one by one at the Tembrae Service in
memory of the Suffering and death of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Cardinal Samuel Stritch sitting on the Archbishop's Throne.

Good Friday 1964 Holy Name Cathedral.  Cardinal Albert Meyer Center.

It's well known that John XXIII disliked Bugnini and shut down his liturgical experimentations.  Paul VI later brought him back in.

Since JXXIII was a super liberal and a suspected freemason, the answer
to your question if Roncalli celebrated the pre 1954 Holy Week after the
revisions is absolutely NO.
In my memory, no one challenged the revisions to Holy Week when they
became mandatory.  All fell in line with the revisions. It was unthinkable
to do otherwise.

rc1953 - I think you have contributed enough.

Ladislaus and prayerful - yes, these are examples of how john xxiii was in some ways torn between two sides.  

I bring all of this up, because of the prospect this act presents to us traditionalists.  +Williamson last year celebrated the pre 54 holy week within the context of his normal 1962 liturgy.  And, I think there is something to this if john xxiii did somewhat the same.  Because, we could argue that by the authority of john xxiii(his actions pre v2) we keep the practice of the pre 54 holy week.  And, I am absolutely sure that I read that in one year of johnxxii's pontificate he celebrated the pre 54 holy week.  

So, this could be somewhat of a unifying trad position.  You appease those(nearly all of tradition) that either is attached to or prefers the pre 54 holy week.  And, I think the R&R camp would be willing to give up st josephs name in the canon for the sake of drawing sedevacantists from their reclusive(I mean that respectfully) liturgical position.  And, we could do this all in the name of john xxiii.  Because, he did the exact same thing immediately before the council.  And, keeping with tradition of before the council is really traditions argument.  +Lefebvre's looked at it in terms of "the last acceptable liturgy".   R&R needs to listen to the cries of the sedevacantists.  And, I think +Williamson is doing that by celebrating the pre 54 holy week and not damning sedevacantists to hell.  It is one thing to think about how to heal all of the divides in the church at large.  But, I think it is probably best to start with tradition.  I think those of good will in tradition would rally around such a liturgy/position.  

The next hurdle is what to do about the una cuм(passionate subject).  And, I think that for starters the solution is to leave out the local bishops name from the canon.  Because, bishops can lose their office due to heresy.  However, that is not the case when it comes to the pope.  And, almost all of tradition believes that if the current pope were to renounce the heresies and undue the damage, he would be true pope.  So, what better place to pray for such a person than in the canon of the mass.  I think these are unifying positions.  So, this is my thinking behind all of this.  And, it gives incentive to do some digging.  Because, believe me folks, I read this from a credible source.  I did not dream it.

I found it!

It is from a rorate caeli article.   http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-reform-of-holy-week-in-years-1951.html

"Despite the wish that the liturgists should sing, as it were, in unison—compounded by a certain monolithic attitude, which in the 1950's was meant to show unity of purpose—authoritative voices were raised in dissent but promptly constrained to silence despite their competence. Such was the case not only for certain episcopates but also for certain liturgists, such as Léon Gromier, who, notable for his well-docuмented commentary on the Caeremoniale Episcoporum, (10) was also a consultor for the Congregation of Rites and a member of the Pontifical Academy of the Liturgy. In July of 1960 in Paris, in a celebrated conference, he spoke his mind [on all of this] in a heated but well-reasoned manner. (11) Pope John XXIII himself, in 1959, at the celebration of Good Friday at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme followed the traditional practices, thus making evident that he was not in agreement with the innovations recently introduced and that he recognized the experimental nature of those changes."

The next question is, what exactly did john xxiii do in 1959?  Because it says next that "Certain reforms introduced experimentally in 1955 and 1956 were clearly inserted into the fabric of the ritual in a clumsy manner, so much so that they were easily corrected in the reform of 1969. But that topic deserves a separate treatment."