The hydrological models used for flood forecasting purposes are usually first calibrated in simulation mode and then applied for flood forecasting in combination with some data assimilation procedure allowing to update and correct the model in real-time. Such a two-step procedure may not be the best choice to train model parameters for forecasting purposes. An alternative approach is to calibrate the hydrological model separately for each target lead time in the presence of the updating procedure. However, it is unclear whether this approach can provide the most efficient and the most robust forecasts. We compared in this paper three approaches to calibrate the parameters of a flood forecasting model: calibration in simulation mode (i.e. without data assimilation), lead-time-dependent calibration (i.e. with data assimilation), and a procedure combining both approaches. An hourly flood forecasting model (a parsimonious hydrological model combined with a state updating assimilation procedure) was used to produce forecasts for three lead times on 687 catchments and 40,411 flood events in metropolitan France. The performance of the model calibrated with the three approaches was evaluated according to catchment response times and flood rise times. An analysis of parameter robustness was also carried out. The results showed that lead-time-dependent calibration improves performance for catchments characterised by slow temporal dynamics. However, for catchments with fast temporal dynamics, it leads to degraded performance at short lead times and reduces parameter robustness. We found that the combined calibration approach is the best compromise between parameter robustness and performance at all lead times and for all catchment and flood types.